Bits Bucket for December 18, 2013
Post off-topic ideas, links, and Craigslist finds here.
The Housing Bubble
Examining the home price boom and its effect on owners, lenders, regulators, realtors and the economy as a whole.
About Me
Name:Ben Jones
Location:Northern Arizona, United States
To donate by mail, or to otherwise contact this blogger, please send emails to: thehousingbubble@gmail.com
PayPal is a secure online payment method which accepts ALL major credit cards.
Links
-
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
Expensive cities are killing creativity
On May 5, musician Patti Smith was asked what advice she had for young people trying to make it in New York City. The long-time New Yorker’s take? Get out. “New York has closed itself off to the young and the struggling,” she said. “New York City has been taken away from you.”
Smith was not the only New Yorker to reject the city that had nurtured artists for decades. In October, musician David Byrne argued that “the cultural part of the city - the mind - has been usurped by the top 1 percent”. Under Michael Bloomberg, New York’s first billionaire mayor, homelessness and rent both soared, making one of the world’s centres of creative and intellectual life unliveable for all but the richest.
At play, notes Byrne, was more than a rise in the cost of living. It was a shift in the perceived value of creativity, backed by an assumption that it must derive from and be tied to wealth. “A culture of arrogance, hubris and winner-take-all was established,” he recalls. “It wasn’t cool to be poor or struggling. The bully was celebrated and cheered.”
New York - and San Francisco, London, Paris and other cities where cost of living has skyrocketed - are no longer places where you go to be someone. They are places you live when you are born having arrived. They are, as journalist Simon Kuper puts it, “the vast gated communities where the one percent reproduces itself”.
There are exceptions in these cities, but they tend to survive by serving the rule. The New York Times recently profiled Sitters Studio, a company that sends artists and musicians into the homes of New York’s wealthiest families to babysit their children.
Creativity - as an expression of originality, experimentation, innovation - is not a viable product. It has been priced out into irrelevance - both by the professionalisation of the industries that claim it, and the soaring cost of entry to those professions.
The “creative class” is a frozen archetype - one that does not boost the economy of global cities, as urban studies theorist Richard Florida argues, but is a product of their takeover by elites. The creative class plays by the rules of the rich, because those are the only rules left.
it is hard for most people to survive in an art world capital like New York, where some homeless people work two jobs. Success by geographical proxy comes with a price: purchased freedom for the rich, serving the rich for the rest. But what happens when we veer off that path? Is it failure? Or is it redefined, recognised anew?
Creativity is sometimes described as thinking outside the box. Today the box is a gilded cage. In a climate of careerist conformity, cheap cities with bad reputations - where, as art critic James McAnalley notes, “no one knows whether it is possible for one to pursue a career” - may have their own advantage.
I frankly don’t know how the musicians I know make it work in SD. I do know they (1) work almost all of their waking hours, between teaching and gigging, and (2) plan to work until they drop.
Why you would live in NY or San Fran as anything other than a banker/IT professional (respectively) escapes me. Sure, if you need to be there for work it makes sense. And NY is where Wall St is and SF is where the Silly Valley is. Ok, got it.
But the waiters? The store clerks? The street sweepers? The police? The firemen? The manager at the local Walmart? (add 10,000 other professions, I think you get the point). Why on earth would you do that in NYC/San Fran rather than just about anywhere else where your standard of living would be dramatically higher? You don’t make that much more money in those areas (except in limited cases) and the cost of living is some big multiple (3X or more) the cost of living in BFE. And, to add a little insult, all the “great things” about the city? You can’t afford any of them!
Over…..i remember in Astoria they were advertising large 1 bedroom apartments in 1999 $99K for ‘99 now they are probably triple that
But at $99K a teacher fireman etc could easily afford it on a $30k salary….i think 2 bed was $125K…
But money came in and ruined everything cool and local.
I could have bought my (rented) Brooklyn studio in 1995 for $32K. No idea what the co-op fee was. It was a doorman building.
Astoria is a great neighborhood with great access to Manhattan, good luck finding anything decent with 2 BR for under $500k. And that’s not in a fancy building, either.
I love the restaurants in that neighborhood
Park Slope? Williamsburg? DUMBO?
, “good luck finding anything decent with 2 BR for under $500k.”
Precisely the reason rental rates are a fraction of the carrying costs of buying the place.
Downlow Joe has entered the building.
Right at the end of the Brooklyn Bridge. Technically dowtown Brooklyn, but the same zipcode as Brooklyn Heights. 225 Adams Street, I think. 400 square feet, approximately. It was still squeegee guy territory back then. About to transition into Nation of Islam. I never had a problem with either group while walking past. I paid off my student loans living in that building. $725 a month.
Sounds like you lived right next to Brooklyn Law School and the E.D.N.Y. court house. That’s an interesting area, when I lived in NY it was ripe for redevelopment and there wasn’t that much residential. Lots of subway access to financial district, IIRC. I only had to go there a few times for EDNY.
There was a Brooklyn Law student who was planning to rent the place. She was just talking to the owner about how to take care of the details when I walked in. I looked around, asked to see the laundry room (it was spotless), checked out the water pressure, and wrote a check on the spot. Who the heck goes to look at an apartment that convinient to her school and for that good a price without a checkbook? I never understood how anyone who was serious about a rental with a private landlord could be that dumb. Didn’t bode well for her law school education IMHO.
“It was a doorman building.”
+1 If you don’t have a doorman you ain’t chit!
What does it mean if your doorman is sometimes asleep when you come back late at night?
“What does it mean if your doorman is sometimes asleep when you come back late at night?”
You likely don’t tip enough.
http://streeteasy.com/nyc/building/concord-village-225-adams-street-brooklyn
http://streeteasy.com/nyc/sale/1043299-coop-225-adams-street-downtown-brooklyn-brooklyn
Hmm…that has had a lot of work done on it compared to my old place and the layout is very different, but that is the building.
Where I come from, the fireman are the ones who can afford those prices.
“firemen”
Well for that matter, the SF Bay Area has a large itinerant musician population who affectionately refer to themselves as The Freeway Philharmonic, as the geographic scope of their musical performances ranges from Modesto to Redding (been there, done that!). Many of these folks string together a living through a combination of membership in a number of regional orchestras along with free lance gigs and private students. It’s a hard life, but it allows them to follow their passion.
Most of the folks I knew in this community lived in relatively cheaper housing communities such as El Cerrito or even Richmond, rather than tony San Francisco.
Hey, Whac. This is the concert I am going to tonight:
http://www.loc.gov/concerts/parkerquartet.html
For our Antonio Stradivari Anniversary concert, the dazzling Parker Quartet returns to play the Stradivari instruments donated by Gertrude Clarke Whittall. Joining them is a distinguished colleague, Kikuei Ikeda, a member of the Tokyo Quartet for nearly 40 years. Instrument aficionados—and regular chamber music fans—should seize the opportunity to hear two of the world’s eleven existing Stradivari violas in this concert: the Whittall Cassavetti, from 1727, and the superb 1690 Tuscan-Medici viola, on loan from the Tuscan Corporation. Through a special collaboration with the S & R Foundation, the artists will repeat this program at the Foundation’s intimate concert hall at Evermay on December 19th.
MENDELSSOHN
String Quartet no. 3 in D major, op. 44, no. 1
ADÈS
Arcadiana
DVOŘÁK
String Quintet in E-flat major, op. 97
I wasn’t aware there were any viola strads.
When I was in HS, my cello teacher’s family trust bought their daughter Strad’s “red violin” when she was studying at USC. I forget the price; it was in the millions obviously. The sound in an instrument like that is good but good instrument makers make nearly the same quality for much less money. An alum of my teacher is in the NY Philharmonic; he had an instrument worth under 100k at the time (newly made).
Lib,
What are vintage harpsichords fetching these days?
I like the harpsichord meme but dislike most baroque music, esp. when a harpsichord is involved. I saw Handel’s Messiah (utilizes a harpsichod) the other week and was reminded of that fact.
I’d check it out sometime but they don’t play any Skynyrd or Hatchet and don’t sell Cheetos at the concession stand.
I don’t fit in with the $hitLib crowd as well as you do. Come to think of it, $hitLibs don’t fit in well in rural new england…….. At all.;)
Rural NE has Tanglewood and other places that shitlibs love.
Also, I love classic rock, as do many people that like classical music. You presuppose a divide that doesn’t really exist. Would it really surprise you to know I like Skynyrd? And I don’t mean just Freebird.
As long as they leave, there’s usually little animosity.
Hey Lib…. is your favorite xmas JingleBalls?
Rural New England is filled with your maligned elites. Alumni of the prep schools and colleges come back to those places and enjoy the cultural institutions that are part of and marginally attached to excellent educational institutions. (They also like being fairly close to regional academic medical centers.) And they might clear out for a few months in the winter, but they live there. They buy expensive houses and, if they still have school age kids, send them to private schools which is fabulous for the tax bases of the towns they live in.
HAs ignorance is showing again.
Not in rural NE. You’re an unreliable source of truthful information.
No cracker for you.
“I wasn’t aware there were any viola strads.”
Also celli and guitars.
How about some positive news, actually this is pretty AWWsum…
http://www.kwch.com/news/local-news/Kansas-student-uses-robot-to-attend-school/-/21054266/23543958/-/eh8cbuz/-/index.html?ver=98
Sounds awesome — look forward to the review!
“Kikuei Ikeda, a member of the Tokyo Quartet for nearly 40 years.”
I’ve heard the Tokyo Quartet play several times over the years. The first time was maybe thirty years back, and the most recent was a performance by a much more mature Tokyo Quartet at the La Jolla Music Society Summerfest.
the new york city of 40 years ago gave us patti smith and the talking heads.
today’s new york city gives us lena dunham.
PUKE
Here we go again.
MORE whining from elitists about how horrible their lives are.
Last week, it was whining about how their ObamaCare costs are rising. Now, it’s whining about the lack of culture available for convenient consumption.
Poor, poor babies.
They paid a pretty penny for a lifestyle worthy of their presence…only to discover that the lower classes cannot afford to provide it.
What tragedy will they experience next? Stay tuned…and please, please pray at the Altar of the State to provide the solution.
Good point, MacBeth. Let’s let the free market dictate what happens in Manhatten. Let’s have all the landlords demand executive rents. Forty years ago, there weren’t as many execs and traders living in Manhatten, so there were some nieghborhoods left over for to house the support staff and the creative class. Now, there are probably enough executives to fill every unit in Manhatten and force the support staff to commute in from who knows where.
So, as overtaxed says, all those Lucky Ducks should pack up and move to Oil City tomorrow where their minimum wages would stretch further. Then who would cut the hair, fix the heat, drive the subway, teach the precious princesses, pick up the trash, and deliver the food for all these high-power execs? Maybe they could eat iPads?
Even the goon squad reports that there are lines of lucky duckmobiles commuting on the highways to lick the boots in Aspen and Vail. This is how you get statist policies like rent control and down payment subsidies for teachers in San Fran.
“The staff” already commutes…. From NNJ, LI, Westchester, Rockland, Dutchess, Orange and Putnam. And they always have since suburbanization.
Remember…. There is massive excess supply and rental rates are falling.
“Manhattan Apartment Rents Drop for a Third Straight Month”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-11/manhattan-apartment-rents-drop-for-a-third-straight-month.html
You did not mention commuters from Eastern Prnnsylvania to Manhattan. Bus loads five days a week.
Let’s let the free market dictate what happens in Manhatten.
That would have required allowing a bunch of Wall Street banks, brokerages, etc. to go bankrupt instead of bailing them out.
Those are the sort of institutions that provide the loudest cheerleading for free markets, but don’t want to work in them themselves.
You do realize I was being sarcastic.
Maybe broke people just buy less art.
If you take on mortgage debt at current massively inflated housing prices, you’ll enslave yourself for the rest of your life.
“Debt is bondage.”~ Suze Orman, May 11, 2013
Don’t Be A Debt Donkey®
Keep throwing money away on rent and paying your landlord’s mortgage.
Yeah but my landlord is underwater.
I’ve learned the downside of having a broke landlord is that they no longer come around to put any new money into their investment property. Worse yet, when they do finally decide to “invest” (i.e. conduct routine maintenance), they try to charge it back as a rent increase to above market rates.
tip your landlord well renter.
After “throwing money away on rent” we have so much money left over we don’t know where to throw it anymore.”
yeah im sure. keep sending that check to the man.
Well…. right now he’s submerged and drowning in debt but when he comes up for air I’ll tell him you said hello.
Have fun spending the holidays in a rental apartment with all the other losers. Nothing feels more like a real Christmas than spending it in your own home.
Yeah but it’s the banks house.
Willy Loman never looked happy owning a house.
Happy to say this will probably be our last Christmas living in a rental!
I don’t understand how much higher USA house prices can get when the income of most Americans has been flat or declining for decades. (Except for the 1% where it’s risen like a rocket.) The promise we’d all do better if we deregulated, off-shored and cut taxes for the rich and corporations just didn’t pay off yet. But it’s only been 33 years. Maybe it will take 100 years or 200 years to work. Maybe it’s a 500 year plan. The man in the picture in today’s article below shows what we all can aspire to be if the damn government would just “get out of the way”.
Income inequality strains economy, says survey Dec. 17, 2013
Analysts cite need for broader spending base
http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/viewart/20131217/GPG03/312170366/Income-inequality-strains-economy-says-survey
WASHINGTON — The growing gap between the richest Americans and everyone else isn’t bad just for individuals.
It’s hurting the U.S. economy.
So says a majority of more than three dozen economists surveyed last week. Their concerns tap into a debate that’s intensified as middle-class pay has stagnated while wealthier households have thrived.
A key source of the economists’ concern: Higher pay and outsize stock market gains are flowing mainly to affluent Americans. Yet these households spend less of their money than do low- and middle-income consumers who make up most of the population but whose pay is barely rising.
“What you want is a broader spending base,” said Scott Brown, chief economist at Raymond James, a financial advisory firm. “You want more people spending money.”
Gap expands over years
Spending by wealthier Americans, given the weight of their dollars, does help drive the economy. But analysts say the economy would be better able to sustain growth if the riches were more evenly dispersed….
“The broader the improvement, the more likely it will be sustained,” said Michael Niemira, chief economist at the International Council of Shopping Centers.
Income inequality has steadily worsened in recent decades, …the average income for the wealthiest 5 percent of U.S. households, adjusted for inflation, has surged 17 percent in the past 20 years. By contrast, average income for the middle 20 percent of households has risen less than 5 percent…
MORE OPINIONS…… The Obama administration’s health care law will make little or no difference to the job market.
“Price fixing is hurting the economy.”<
There is hope for you Lola.
Yes, Rio the subprime loan crisis is contained or the equivalent for the ACA. It is sinking like a stone and it is chained to the Democrats neck.
Never mine the fraud that we know is going on with ACA( people claiming to be citizens) now we find out that people with temporary legal status are eligible from Obamacare.
http://news.yahoo.com/many-immigrants-hesitate-seek-health-insurance-192433697–finance.html
Speaking of illegals from a drudge link:
Senate Republicans were unable to stop military pension cuts when Senate Democrats blocked a vote on an amendment to prevent the cuts by closing a welfare loophole for illegal immigrants Tuesday evening.
The two-year budget deal brokered by Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray and House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, would cut military pensions by $6 billion over ten years, leaving some Senate Republicans scrambling to stop the cuts.
“Removing this unbalanced treatment of our military retirees ought to be one of the key actions we should take before this legislation moves forward. In fact, greater savings than this can be achieved by passing a legislative fix recommended by the Inspector General of the U.S. Treasury that would stop the IRS from improperly providing tax credits to illegal aliens,” Alabama Republican Jeff Sessions said Monday, announcing his co-sponsorship of Mississippi Republican Sen. Roger Wicker’s amendment to restore the military retirement benefits Monday.
racis
I don’t understand how much higher USA house prices can get when the income of most Americans has been flat or declining for decades.
The wealthy hedge funds buy the houses at high prices cash because they don’t have to pay interest. They rent the house out to the flat-income Americans. If the rent goes up, the renters will just shack up their incomes tighter until we have tenements again.
If there are empty units left over, the hedge fund owners will just mark-to-market, let the house itself fall apart, and beg for another bailout. And if that doesn’t work…. well who cares, it would take 15 years to shake all that out and by then all the can kickers will be retired in Tahiti and it won’t be their problem.
Easy peasy.
“The wealthy hedge funds” bought just a small fraction of the excess supply. And it failed for them.
*Think* before you write.
oxide:
1) I don’t think any of the hedge funds are powerful enough to get a bailout.
2) From what I’ve read, the Blackstones have about 50% debt, and it’s not long-term like a mortgage. It’s commercial debt.
3) The Blackstones only own about 5% of the rental inventory in the cities where they’re active. They can’t control rents.
You can guarantee Rio that this will be used to raise taxes and take away tax breaks on income. for the few remaining workers with high incomes. You can also guarantee that it will do almost nothing to increase taxes on the elites. Buffet and Romney etc will continue to pay under 10% effective tax rates.
A lot of people are worried about not enough young people signing up for ObamaCare. They think it might doom Obamacare and make premiums skyrocket. (Which have skyrocketed for 20 years) A study just released counters that opinion.
Why Obamacare won’t spiral into fiery, actuarial doom
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/12/17/why-obamacare-wont-spiral-into-fiery-actuarial-doom/
The rumors of an Obamacare death spiral have been greatly exaggerated.
So say Larry Levitt, Gary Claxton and Anthony Damico, experts at the Kaiser Family Foundation who have put together a new brief analyzing what would happen if young adults snubbed the Affordable Care Act. Even if young people sign up at half the rate the administration hopes for, it would nudge premiums up only by a few percentage points, their report says.
“When you do the math, it matters, but not nearly as much as the conventional wisdom suggests,” Levitt says…..
…As for a death spiral, Levitt and his colleagues’ research suggests that’s a very unlikely outcome — no matter what the doomsayers might be predicting.
A great many young people in the United States have just learned that worshipping the Altar of the State to be at least suspect, if not bad.
Spend some time reading up on Grover Cleveland, rio. You might learn something interesting.
A great many young people in the United States have just learned that worshipping the Altar of the State to be at least suspect, if not bad.
I never seem to meet any of these young people. Maybe they all live in the South?
“I never seem to meet any of these young people.”
I notice that the young avoid eye contact. Disenfranchised?
Yes, I have seen that, too.
Put the blame where it belongs: on technology. The young are comfortable having direct eye contact with IPads, but not human beings.
You’re wrong on this. The young have learned to be suspect of the old. The old just want to take away their phones and make them work for no pay. If you avoid eye contact you avoid making yourself noticed. Those damn oldies try to exploit every single thing they notice, hence the young have learned to be unnoticeable and anonymous.
They avoid eye contact because they are tapping on their iPhones. I’m not picking up any resentment about welfare queens or even paying Social Security taxes for the elderly — that seems to be reserved for middle-aged talking points. Instead, millenials resent the baby boomers for hanging on and on and not retiring and freeing up jobs. I heard a story of one millenial telling a baby boomer straight up “we’re not waiting for you to retire; we’re waiting for you to die.”
I don’t live in the South, yet I have met maybe as many as two dozen.
Perhaps you haven’t met any because of who you choose to fraternize with.
What I meant to say was, I meet plenty of young people (some at work, some through my kids and their friends), but none of them seem to worship at Ayn Rand’s altar.
It will be interesting to see how young voters cast their ballots in 2016. Will they become born again conservatives? Time will tell, but I seriously doubt it.
This is the same Kaiser Family Foundation that put out a study claiming that Messiahcare premiums would be less than expected back in September before it all fell apart. How correct was that?
They are a mouthpiece bunch of shills same as you Lola.
This is from yesterday’s thread. There was a discussion of poor poor Blackstone thinking that they could treat housing/rentals like stocks or MBS:
—————–
Comment by Ben Jones
2013-12-17 18:42:11
‘they fail to realize the original mortgages gained their reputation of safety by aggressive pre-filtration, while renters have a shady reputation for a reason’
Hmm. So why is there an army of contractors like me, in every city in every state that work to haul off rat infested trash, fix busted walls, doors, windows, replace stolen appliances, heaters, AC units, left behind by these reputable house owners, and no such army exists for the shady renters houses?
—————–
You’re saying that mortgage holders are as shady as renters. Yes, they are now. But my comment was that the original mortgages were safe because of pre-filtration. Those original mortgages were from the 1940’s until about the mid 1990’s, when there WAS aggressive pre-filtration in the form of down payments and income documentation. Those were pretty safe MBS. During the 2003-2008 housing bubble, banks did not do the pre-filtration, but still traded on that original pristine reputation to sell MBS. Fannie, Freddie, CALPERS, towns in Norway and other dupes thought they were buying 1970’s style mortgages. Booking an option payment as a fully amort (deferred interest) kept up the illusion. That why this whole thing fell apart, and that’s why MBS now have a toxic rep. You’re cleaning up after renters who should never have been allowed to buy.
So, who is buying the rental-backed securities that Blackstone is trying to sell? Hopefully not Fannie/Freddie.
Apparently nobody considering MBS market is dead.
And you conveniently mischaracterized the housing bubble as 2003-2008……
Nice try Donkey.
Invest in negative cash flow, great idea.
Is Obamacare Really an Improvement on the Status Quo?
I’m curious, has anyone on this blog used ACA?
http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-17/is-obamacare-really-an-improvement-on-the-status-quo-.html
Make sure you sign up for identity theft protection(Life-Lock?) before you go to the ACA. 600MM and the f’ed up Govt. can’t keep your info safe. Security was never designed in to begin with. “If you like your identity, you can keep your identity”.
I’m an evil rich person. So I don’t qualify for any Obamacare freebies. I have to - GHASP - pay for my own health care. I wonder if that’s racis?
Mr. Smithers
Nothing wrong with being successful. Good for you. Something is wrong with premium gouging. Kaiser has $12B in reserves, exceeding govt regulations, and priced many of us out of the insurance market. If we stayed we’d be paying $1,600/mo. Ouch!
(2 healthy adults w/ controlled Glaucoma)
CXO’s of these non-profits should not be paid $9M/yr & bonuses.) Want that kind of dough, go elsewhere.
You must be in California.
Prior to ObamaCare, there were significant differences in cost across the country.
Again, please be on guard against the assumption that most people paid out what people in California and New York were paying. Not even close.
Hi Mac:
Wher in “x”’s comment is that assumption made? I don’t see it.
MacBeth
Yep, So Ca.
Success = trust fund babyhood.
I’m planning on it in my next life.
We paid $1,200 a month for Kaiser, and it will be a fraction of that under the ACA for a PPO. It use to kills us that we did without to pay the premium and co-pays, and so many got a free ride (govt paid). It’s our turn to get at least a break. Next stop is universal healthcare.
Why are the illegals (oops, undocumented immigrants) exempt from this obligation and penalties? I think that’s treasonous and discriminative to Americans.
That is nativist and probably racis. Our differences only make us stronger.
Because the US government doesn’t have the jurisdiction to make citizens of other countries do anything, such as pay taxes, etc. It only has the jurisdiciton to give them free stuff when they come here.
The ACA part you are referring to hasn’t started yet. It starts in January. So no-one has used it.
If you’ve seen calories listed on a menu, you have used the ACA. If your health check ups now don’t require a co-pay you’ve also used the ACA.
If you’ve paid an extra 10% on glasses, hearing aids and any other medical device, you’ve used Obmacare’s medical devices tax.
But it’s coo. You get free birth control that would otherwise cost you $100 a year.
Lord help you if you own a house or a business in one of them…
—————
Big Dem Cities, Big Dem Poverty
FrontPage Magazine | December 17, 2013 | Arnold Ahlert
On Sunday’s ABC This Week telecast, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich squared off with former Clinton Labor secretary Robert Reich, who tried to blame the increase in poverty over the last five years on the GOP. “Here’s the baloney,” Gingrich fired back. “Every major city which is a center of poverty is run by Democrats. Every major city. Their policies have failed, they’re not willing to admit and the fact is it’s the poor who suffer from bad government.” Unfortunately for the millions of Americans, Gingrich is right on the money. Here is a breakdown of the ten cities with populations above 250,000 that have borne the brunt of Democratic ideology.
St. Louis’s poverty rate is 26 percent overall, and four-in-ten children live in poverty. Like Detroit, the city has experienced a major population decline, from 850,000 in the mid-20th century to 318,000 in 2013. Last year’s Annual Performance Report gave the city’s public schools a rating of 24.6 percent on a scale of zero to 100 percent. The city, which is also reeling from $640 million in unfunded pension liabilities, is currently rated the third most dangerous large city in the nation. St. Louis’s current mayor is Francis G. Slay, who has served since 2001. There hasn’t been a Republican mayor in St. Louis since 1949.
Newark, New Jersey’s poverty rate is 26.1 percent. Its former mayor, Cory Booker, who was recently elected to the United States Senate, was the latest in a long, unbroken line of Democratic mayors dating back 106 years to 1907. Former Newark Mayor Sharpe James was convicted of five counts of fraud in 2008. Yet he is hardly an anomaly: with the exception of Booker, every Mayor of Newark since 1962 has been indicted for crimes committed during their tenure in office. Between 2005 and 2012, the city’s population declined from 281,063 to 278,906, while violent crime totals increased from 2,821 to 3,219.
The residents of Cincinnati, OH are afflicted by a poverty rate of 27.4 percent overall, with a staggering 53.1 percent child poverty rate as of 2012. Former Democratic Mayor Mark Mallory left recently-elected Democrat Mayor John Cranley a $60 million deficit throughout 2012, and an annual budget shortfall of 20 percent, leading many to believe that bankruptcy is imminent. Cincinnati’s last non-Democrat mayor, Charter Party member Arnold L. Bortz, served until 1984.
In Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 28 percent of city residents overall live in poverty, a number that balloons to 40 percent in terms of child poverty. Democratic voter registration outnumbers Republican registration by a six-to-one margin in a city where the last Republican mayor to hold office, Bernard Samuel, was voted out in 1952. Current mayor Michael Nutter is presiding over a city with the lowest credit rating of the country’s five most populous cities ($8.75 billion in outstanding debt) and a pension system that is only funded at a level of 47.6 percent. Last March, city officials voted to close 9 percent of the city’s public schools due to a five-year $1.35 billion spending gap.
Milwaukee, Wisconsin sports a poverty rate of 29.9 percent overall, including 42.6 percent of children under 18. Like Camden, Milwaukee boasts a track record of non-Republican mayors going back 105 years to 1908. But they weren’t all Democrats. In 2011, the city marked the 101st anniversary of the election of Emil Seidel, the first of three Socialist Party mayors of Milwaukee. Current Mayor Tom Barrett claims the poverty experienced in his city is a “regional problem,” but 71 percent of those who live in poverty in a four-county area were concentrated in Milwaukee.
In Buffalo, New York, 29.9 percent of residents overall are living below the poverty level, with children enduring a poverty rate of 46.8 percent, third highest in the nation behind Detroit and Camden. Mayor Byron Brown presides over a city that has lost 11 percent of its population over the last dozen years, due in large part to a stagnating economy. Buffalo’s last Republican mayor served until 1965.
In Cleveland, Ohio, 36 percent of its residents live in poverty. In 1978, when current U.S. House of Representatives Democrat Dennis Kucinich was mayor, the city became the first one since the Great Depression to default on its debt. It remained in default until 1987. In 2011, the city’s credit rating was downgraded by Fitch, due to concerns about the city’s struggling economy and shrinking population. Cleveland, whose current mayor is Frank G. Jackson, hasn’t had a Republican mayor since 1989. During Jackson’s tenure, the police, fire and sanitation departments have been cited for excessive use of force, payroll abuse, and chronic billing problems, respectively.
And then, there is Detroit, Michigan, in a class by itself, with 36.2 percent of residents living in poverty, along with an astounding 60 percent of the city’s children in the same boat. The city itself is utterly dysfunctional with $20 billion of debt, 78,000 abandoned homes, collapsing or nonexistent municipal services, and 47 percent illiteracy rate. It is also the most dangerous city in the nation. Yesterday, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Steven Rhodes allowed his rulings declaring the city eligible for bankruptcy, and leaving public employee pensions systems vulnerable to cuts for retirees, to proceed to the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. Detroit is on track to becoming the largest city in the nation to go bankrupt. Democrat Dave Bing is the current mayor, representing an unbroken string of Democrats going back to 1962.
Camden, New Jersey rounds out the top ten, with a poverty rate of 42.5 percent, and child poverty rate of 56.7 percent. In one poll, Camden was rated the second most dangerous city in the nation, with gang violence cited as a chief contributing factor. Democrat Dana Redd is the current mayor of the city. Frederick Von Nieda was Camden’s last Republican Mayor — he served until 1936.
For Democrats, this is a feature, not a bug. Every person living in poverty is a lifelong straight “D” voter. No poverty = no Dem voters.
You might be interested in this graphic: http://i.imgur.com/NV7AeZx.jpg
That’s our copyrighted template for journalism about racial topics.
Who leaked that?
Did you share that with the partners at your firm, Joe?
you are racis and don’t like black people.
percent black residents by city from wikipedia:
detroit 82.7
cleveland 53.3
newark 52.4
st louis 49.2
cincinnati 44.8
philadelphia 43.4
milwaukee 40.0
buffalo 38.6
And match those cities with how many are functionally illiterate….and my War on Ebonics is the best solution to end this crap.
There’s a glaring, obvious flaw in Gingrich’s argument. Nearly every city of any size in the country has a Democratic mayor. So relatively prosperous cities like Boston, Austin, Seattle and San Jose have Democratic mayors. It’s like saying that the problem with Detroit, Camden, etc. is that their mayors are high school graduates, or vertebrates.
Of course, the difference is that those four prosperous cities have either lots of government jobs, or industries supported or developed by the federal government, or both.
“Nearly every city of any size in the country has a Democratic mayor.”
There are the old cities which have been infested by progressives for many decades, and the newer cities already choking on their first 10 to 20 years of progressive rule, my city included. Those new cities are probably about a decade or two away from a similar fate.
Ever hear the term sanctuary city? The progressives want to import and create poverty in the newer cities in order retain power, they also create as many union city government jobs as possible and create districts that cater to urban hipster types who are more likely to vote for progressives. Rinse and repeat.
The progressives are all about political power at any cost, they care not what the long term consequences of their actions may be. Do you think the policy makers who destroyed Detroit and other cities think they did anything wrong? No, they blame the racist hard working public and rich white guys.
Where do you live?
He lives in fantasyland.
Do you think the policy makers who destroyed Detroit and other cities think they did anything wrong? No, they blame the racist hard working public and rich white guys.
I don’t know how rich they were, but I assume that it was mostly white guys who came up with the ideas behind such products as the Chevy Vega and the Ford Pinto.
I have not signed up for ObamaCare. Nor will I.
I conducted roughly a week of research on my state exchanges. My monthly hit increased from $145 to $340 (more than doubling) for less coverage on both the medical and pharmaceutical sides.
My deductible also more than doubled, from $1200 to $3250 annually.
I’d pay $7200 out of pocket before I’d get any benefit. Wee.
I elected to take the tax hit instead.
And I started an HSA.
I may begin to look into discount cards.
You do realize you need a health insurance policy in order to start an HSA right? You can’t just have an HSA on its own. It has to be in conjunction with an HSA eligible health insurance policy.
Oops - sorry.
I’ve had the HSA for years. I’ll have to start relying on that for my medical bills since I’m no longer covered.
Thanks, Obama. You jerk.
they need money to give all those democrats some more free stuff.
Apparently the uninsured aren’t to pleased with ObamaCare, either. And I don’t mean the newly uninsured because of ObamaCare.
If you’ve been sitting on the fence, now’s the time to buy a home.
Simple question.
When inflation hits the housing rental market, won’t the cost of renting be prohibitive? Especially when you retire and you’re on a fixed income?
As I approach retirement I think about how I can afford to live. Having a home, paying it off and then retiring either gives me a place to or a place to rent.
If you rent all of your life, what is your fall back? Living in an RV in Quartzite AZ?
It already hit. Rental rates are falling.
more lies and bs.
And not only are rental rates falling;
“Manhattan Apartment Rents Drop for a Third Straight Month”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-11/manhattan-apartment-rents-drop-for-a-third-straight-month.html
rental rates are a half the cost of buying at current massively inflated asking prices of resale housing.
So again we ask you $hitHousePoet;
Why buy a house today when the losses are irrecoveravable?
cheaper to rent here buddy. keep sending that check to the landlord buddy. you’ll get nowhere fast.
No $hitPoet….. Rental rates are a small fraction of the cost of buying regardless of location.
You don’t seem to like that reality. Why?
you dont have a clue about reality. if I took your advice id still be renting bitchen how I missed the boat agian.
And not only are rental rates half the carrying costs of a buying the depreciating asset, rental rates are falling too.
Sounds like a perfect storm.
“you dont have a clue about reality. if I took your advice id still be renting bitchen how I missed the boat agian.”
With all that equity you’ve been spending, your monthly is probably double rent in the area. You don’t own chit, except for a contract with the bank which you’re likely to default on. You’re a future deadbeat, and you read like a drunk.
The price you pay determines your rate of return.
If you are able to buy at the right price and then pay off the mortgage then you get to enjoy the benifits of getting a good return from imputed rent.
But if you buy at the wrong price then even if you pay it off your return from imputed rent will be dismal.
Your concept is sound but today’s market makes the application of your concept a bit questionable.
Here’s the deal Combo. I do thank you for your comments.
When I retire I know exactly what my mortgage/rent will be and there’s a good chance I’ll pay it off. I’m not sure if some have really thought about that nor asked:
What is my rent going to be when I retire or am I hoping the government will take care of that?
I know there are maintenance costs, insurance and taxes. IMO these are manageable if you do preventative maintenance.
Have you calculated your losses yet?
If you get a mortgage with a monthly ITIM payment that is twice your current rent, plus a P payment that is 1x your current rent, then the chances are very high that you would be better off waiting for prices to crash. If you expect to live long enough for it to matter, then you should live long enough to witness the next crash.
On the other hand, if prices are low enough for investors to get a historically-average returns on current rents, then prices will probably not crash, and you should probably buy.
One must understand the conditions before making a decision. Relying on “normal-case” default decisions doesn’t always work.
Things are different here in AZ and that’s important. I know some of you can’t do this but I want some of you to consider that sometimes it is possible.
I was renting a nice 3 bed apt with garage for $1200.
I bought a small house 300 sq ft bigger for a PITI less than $900 w/ $10,000 down.
If I pay it off in 15 years, when I retire I can live rent free, rent it out for some spending money (2013 Boss 302) or sell it.
You renters have no idea what your living expenses are going to be. Or do you?
Blackhawk:
What year did you buy? I wager it wasn’t 2013.
Things are different here in AZ
No… they’re not. I promise you that.
I was renting
Post a link of it.
I bought
Post a link of it.
Living in a rental will never feel like a real home.
amen!!!
No no no. You see hyperinflation will hit everything BUT rentals. How? Magic or something.
Renting has its place in certain situations and times. Renting your entire life…not so smart,
“Renting has its place in certain situations and times. Renting your entire life…not so smart”
I couldn’t agree more. Housing, if purchased at a reasonable price, has one incredible feature that, while most don’t understand, does wonders for those retiring. It’s a leveraged inflation hedge.
The mortgage on my house has an effective rate of 2.53% (after the MID calculation). If you think that inflation over the next 30 years is going to average <2.53% then I have a bridge I’d like to sell you..
And, if inflation does pick up, you get to feel it on both “sides” of the equation. Your fixed asset price should rise moderately (the home value) AND you should see your salary increase somewhat to keep pace with inflation. As the same time, your payment will remain the same, regardless of the inflation rate or value of your home. This can lead to the “financial nirvana” that buying a house is always touted as by RE-scum.
The thing that nobody talks about is that inflation is not guaranteed to go up and, also, even if it does, you might not live in the house long enough to take advantage of it. However, in today’s climate, IMHO, you’d be a fool to bet that:
A) Inflation is going to remain below 3% for the next 30 years
AND
B) Home prices 30 years from now are going to be the same, or lower than they are today
IF, and BIG IF, you’re comfortable that you’re buying a house you’ll be in for the long term.
My wife and I bought our “forever house” in 2010 and re-fi’ed it last year to a 3.5% 30Y fixed. I never would have bought if I thought I’d be moving anytime soon (hopefully next move will be to a senior citizens center), but, given that we knew we wanted to stay long term, the price of the house (100/sq/ft) and the interest rate that we could get at the time (which we’ve now improved) it was a bit of a no-brainer for us to buy. And it’s worked out well, we like the house and 3 years later, it’s worth more than we paid for it.
That’s how housing is supposed to work, a great inflation hedge with potential for moderate capital appreciation. If inflation hits hard, those holding long term debt (the debtors) will be big winners; those in cash or lending on a long term fixed basis will be big losers.
All of this, of course, is predicated on the rent vs own calculators coming out with reasonable numbers. If it costs 2X to own than to rent, you’re better off renting. But if you can buy for about the same cost of renting, get a low long term fixed rate loan and know you’re going to stay in that house long term, it can be a good decision to buy rather than rent. Also, it helps if home prices in your area are around 100/sq/ft, that’s around the replacement cost for a mid-tier home in most of the country; and it’s where you want to start your calculations of value.
There’s either ;
a)Price Fixing
b)Inflation
You have them comingled and you’ve confused yourself as a result.
There is no “capital appreciation” of a depreciating asset. On an inflation adjusted basis, it’s capital depreciation. And if you think the house you signed for 30 years of interest on is somehow “worth more than we paid”, I have car to sell you to drive over that bridge you’re talking about.
I’m spending my equity on some xmas gifts.
Financing christmas for 30 years?
Brilliant $hitHousePoet….. Brilliant.
Got cash?
Ok, I’ll bite.
The house we bought in 2010 for 500K is worth about 650K now. You can debate that point all you want, but that’s about what it’s worth given the recent sales in my neighborhood. I suppose you could argue that 650K in 2013/2014 is less than 500K in 2010, but, I’ll just have to disagree with you on that one (I don’t think we’ve had 10% inflation for the past few years).
And yes, you are right about one thing, housing depreciates. It’s the land that’s under my house that’s really increased in value. Housing deprecates, land appreciates, a “house” in comprised of both land and a house. So, up to you how you “cut it up”.
Want to get even more annoyed? My parents bought over by Tampa in 2011 for ~70K (foreclosure). That house is worth at least 130K now given recent sales in the neighborhood (and is easier to value because there are so many identical units). Are we back in a bubble? Perhaps; although 130K for the place my parents bought is right around 100/sq/ft. 650K for my house is more than 100/sq/ft, but the land it sits on is much more valuable to some people (waterfront).
You can value a house at whatever number you want. You can believe that you can build for 30/sq/ft and wind up with a house like mine if you’d like. But, at the end of the day, value is determined by what you can sell it for. If I sold this house at 650K, guess what, it’s worth 650K. Just like it was worth 500K the day that I bought it. Anything else is just make believe and/or speculation. And yes, just to set the record straight, my basis in this house is quite a bit higher than 500K, I’ve probably spent 50K over the last few years getting it the way that I wanted it.
But, to the original question, do you think that:
A) Inflation is likely to be <3% for the next 30 years
B) Housing is likely to cost the same or less in 30 years than it does today?
If you think that both of those are true, then, absolutely, don’t buy. If you don’t, then you need to start thinking about the replacement cost of housing and rent vs buy ratios to see if buying a house makes sense for your situation.
The house we bought in 2010 for 500K is worth about 650K now.
Highly unlikely. Even more of a stretch is finding a buyer for just what you paid for it.
There isn’t a house on the planet worth $500k. Signing up for $1 million in debt for a house is clearly irresponsible.
It’s the land that’s under my house that’s really increased in value
No it doesn’t. Land doesn’t “appreciate”. Land is static, tracks inflation(inflation is non-existent) and highly speculative and volatile. I’d love to read what you think this land is worth. We buy land all year long… it’s not worth much and we don’t pay much because it’s not worth much.
My parents bought over by Tampa in 2011 for ~70K (foreclosure). That house is worth at least 130K now
Again with the speculative silliness. You might find a buyer for $70k. Maybe.
You can value a house at whatever number you want.
No. That is what you’re doing. We develop a detailed estimate, construction schedule and sub-contractor bid packages and then totalize it. It really is simple, honest math. Use it frequently.
But, to the original question, do you think that:
A) Inflation is likely to be <3% for the next 30 years
B) B) Housing is likely to cost the same or less in 30 years than it does today?
I responded to it. You’re co-mingling inflation with price fixing. Learn the difference.
If you think that both of those are true, then, absolutely, don’t buy. If you don’t, then you need to start thinking about the replacement cost of housing and rent vs buy ratios to see if buying a house makes sense for your situation.
Establishing the cost of a new house and determining the residual value of a new house is something you should have done. We do it every day.
Overtaxed: The house we bought in 2010 for 500K is worth about 650K now.
• A 650K house and a dollar will buy you a cup of coffee.
• Your net result is higher property taxes.
The only people that made out like bandits as a result of the bubble were the FIRE sector - the infrastructure behind the transactions. The “House” in terms of a casino.
A lot of Realtors did get caught up in using the drug they were selling (i.e. thinking they could make money flipping houses, instead of sticking to taking commissions on the transaction). When the music stopped, they got caught, and turned into Squealtors.
If you believe that house prices are going increase linearly for the next 30 years, without ever going down between now and then, in every location in the United States, then I have a bridge in Florida that I’d like to sell you.
“If you believe that house prices are going increase linearly for the next 30 years, without ever going down between now and then, in every location in the United States, then I have a bridge in Florida that I’d like to sell you.”
I certainly didn’t say or intend to imply that. What I did intend to imply was that, 30 years from now, it’s near 100% certain that house prices will be higher than they are today. And, if history holds true, you can figure out that rate of growth by looking at inflation; if inflation is 3% per year for 30 years, you can assume that the house you buy today will be worth somewhere between 2-3X (in nominal dollars; they will, of course, have devalued by nearly the same amount) what you pay for it today. That’s a normal housing market, absent crazy loans/Fed manipulation, etc.
You could have years that are up 10%, and years that are down 15%. But, on average, you can use that 3%/year number as the normal expect asset value growth of housing through time. Now, when we are in a bubble, that, of course, does not work at all (ala, 2006 prices that are now down 30-50% in many areas). But that wasn’t a normal housing market, by any stretch of the imagination.
There isn’t a house on the planet worth $500k.
LOL
Ho Ho Ho Ho Ho
We have a for-real comedian here, folks!
We all know that intuitively…. except for you.
Now lets get down to business shall we?
it’s near 100% certain that house prices will be higher than they are today.
A 100% certainty? Why? How?
Why would housing price be higher 30 years from now when current prices have 30 years of wage inflation built in to them?
Now go ahead.
“A 100% certainty? Why? How? ”
All right, I’ll take one more bite at the apple, although, frankly, I’m not sure it’s worth it. You really believe that houses are worth 0, land is worth 0, and, until it gets there; we’re in a bubble. That’s kind of a hard position to start from.
Now, why 100% certainty? Let’s see, there’s several reasons.
For all of recorded history in the US, no matter what 30 year period you pick, at the end of that period, housing has always been worth more than at the beginning. Always, without fail, 100% of the time, even if you end the 30 year period in the heart of the great depression (or the bottom of the current housing bust).
We have also never, in recorded history, had a 30 year period that didn’t see significant inflation in both assets and wages.
http://visualeconsite.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/RealHousingPrices_1890_2010_log.png
And, the next reason, we’ve never seen a 30 year period in the United States where we didn’t have inflation, both in asset prices and in wages.
Could this be the black swan 30 years? I suppose, yes, it could. However, it seems far more likely to me that the entirety of recorded history in the US will simply repeat itself again; we’ll go back to normal and things will get back to keeping pace with inflation.
Even if we have the “black swan” I think it’s far more likely that we print our way out of it (causing inflation) than we do what was done during the Great Depression. Our economy depends on money printing and inflation, betting against either, especially over a 30 year term, isn’t a wise move.
So, that said, why are you so confident that housing in 30 years will be worth less than it is today. And remember, I’m talking nominally here, not inflation adjusted. Inflation adjusted, yes, I think there’s a good chance that they may not be worth any more (and perhaps less) than they are today. But nominally? Not a chance in he** IMHO.
“You really believe that houses are worth 0, land is worth 0, and, until it gets there; we’re in a bubble.”
You attribute that statement to me. I never said that. You have an integrity issue.
“That’s kind of a hard position to start from.
Yet that’s precisely the position you put yourself in.
Now, why 100% certainty? Let’s see, there’s several reasons.
For all of recorded history in the US, no matter what 30 year period you pick, at the end of that period, housing has always been worth more than at the beginning.
For all of recorded history in the US, housing never exceeded the inflation rate. Prices remained flat for generations until 1998. Thus your statement is false. (We fully understand why ignore this. You paid a massive amount for a mcmansion dead center in a global mania.)
Always, without fail, 100% of the time, even if you end the 30 year period in the heart of the great depression (or the bottom of the current housing bust).
No. Never. EVER. PS- We’re not at the bottom. We’re very far from it.
We have also never, in recorded history, had a 30 year period that didn’t see significant inflation in both assets and wages.
Never in recorded history have we seen housing price deviate from wages concurrent with wages going negative to flat.(This is another reality you deliberately ignored and signed up for $1million in debt)
And, the next reason, we’ve never seen a 30 year period in the United States where we didn’t have inflation, both in asset prices and in wages.
You’re repeating yourself. Why?
Could this be the black swan 30 years? I suppose, yes, it could. However, it seems far more likely to me that the entirety of recorded history in the US will simply repeat itself again; we’ll go back to normal and things will get back to keeping pace with inflation.
The black swan event, process in this case, occurred 1994-current.
Even if we have the “black swan” I think it’s far more likely that we print our way out of it (causing inflation) than we do what was done during the Great Depression. Our economy depends on money printing over a 30 year term, isn’t a wise move.
Printing a quadrillion and storing in lockers has no net effect on anything. ANYTHING.
So, that said, why are you so confident that housing in 30 years will be worth less than it is today. And remember, I’m talking nominally here, not inflation adjusted. Inflation adjusted, yes, I think there’s a good chance that they may not be worth any more (and perhaps less) than they are today. But nominally? Not a chance in he** IMHO.
I’ve explained this to you over and over again to you and your other usernames. You don’t like the answer. And again… we understand why you don’t like the answer. You’re entire future depends on that answer being something other than the reality.
Step back and take an inventory of yourself and what you say. You’re so deep in it financially that I doubt you can do it.
“You’re entire future depends on that answer being something other than the reality. ”
Why? What difference does it make to me? If prices drop to 0 (or near 0), I’ll walk away. If they don’t then I have a nice house to live in at a price that’s equivalent to what I was paying for rent. Yes, I’d bang up my credit by walking away. But, if prices drop that far, so will just about everyone else; do you think that you’re going to be the last man standing and able to buy up half the country for a song because you don’t have a foreclosure?
“I’ve explained this to you over and over again to you and your other usernames.”
I don’t have any other usernames. Ben can see the IPs, if he cares to weigh in, but, take my word for it, I’m not using other names to “boost” my comments.
“Step back and take an inventory of yourself and what you say. You’re so deep in it financially that I doubt you can do it.”
I say what I say not to boost the value of my assets or to “salve my wounds” from buying, but, because, I think it’s true. Could I be wrong? Sure. Shoot, 30 years from now, we might be a banana republic and my house is worth nothing at all. Or taxes could rise through the roof. Or we could have massive deflation. Lots of things could happen that would prove me wrong. However, the most likely thing to happen, from looking at history, is that the value of my house mirrors the rate of inflation. Over a long period of time, that means that it’s very likely that I’d be able to sell it more 30 years from now (again, nominally) than I purchased it for.
So, you tell me HA, what’s a house worth? It’s not 0. It’s not what I paid? So, what’s it worth? 10/sq/ft? 25? 50? And what’s the land worth in S. FL on the water? 50/acre? 500? 500,000?
What should you (or I) pay for a house? Or is no number low enough because of the deflation that you see in the future?
Why? What difference does it make to me?
Don’t play stupid
If prices drop to 0 (or near 0), I’ll walk away.
Again with this zero nonsense. Like I said, that’s you saying it.
If they don’t then I have a nice house to live in at a price that’s equivalent to what I was paying for rent.
Using honest math, this is false. We know it. You know it.
Yes, I’d bang up my credit by walking away. But, if prices drop that far, so will just about everyone else;
More all or nothing nonsense. Nobody really cares what you do with your underwater depreciating asset.
do you think that you’re going to be the last man standing and able to buy up half the country for a song because you don’t have a foreclosure?
This isn’t about me. And lets crush your myth right now. I have more than enough buildings to deal with. I’m not interested in run down houses. Not yours or anyone elses.
I don’t have any other usernames. Ben can see the IPs, if he cares to weigh in, but, take my word for it, I’m not using other names to “boost” my comments.
Nobody cares about your IP addresses and proxies.
I say what I say not to boost the value of my assets or to “salve my wounds” from buying, but, because, I think it’s true. Could I be wrong? Sure. Shoot, 30 years from now, we might be a banana republic and my house is worth nothing at all. Or taxes could rise through the roof. Or we could have massive deflation. Lots of things could happen that would prove me wrong. However, the most likely thing to happen, from looking at history, is that the value of my house mirrors the rate of inflation. Over a long period of time, that means that it’s very likely that I’d be able to sell it more 30 years from now (again, nominally) than I purchased it for.
We already have massive deflation. There is no “inflation”. Learn the difference.
So, you tell me HA, what’s a house worth? It’s not 0. It’s not what I paid? So, what’s it worth? 10/sq/ft? 25? 50? And what’s the land worth in S. FL on the water? 50/acre? 500? 500,000?
Again… you continue to a ask question that has already been answered. You just don’t like the answer.
As I approach retirement…
Glad to see you are finally thinking about this.
You definitely need to have inflation hedges in your portfolio. Even my 80+-year-old dad gets this. He told me last weekend that he just rolled over a retiring CD investment into inflation protected bonds.
Go ahead and buy if you can afford to. But if you are counting on appreciation you are a speculator, plain and simple.
Realtors are liars because they assume and promise appreciation as part of the deal. That is why they are rightfully hated, having conned so many into bad deals.
People grow up, get married, start families, and need to buy homes. I work to help them buy the home of their dreams.
Well… rents did rise rapidly during the 2000s, but that’s not always the historic case. Here’s a table of historical rents from Census.gov:
https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/census/historic/grossrents.html
They list them in inflation adjusted and unadjusted dollars. To understand how your buying power is affected, the inflation adjusted dollars are more informative.
I do agree with the benefits of a fixed rate 30 year loan. But while the central planners keep house prices artificially inflated, well above any historical trendlines (per the Case Shiller index), renting seems to be the best option for building net worth.
Fraudulent mortgages ballooned the house prices and central planners have kept the prices from readjusting to market-clearing levels.
I wonder why they include electricity/fuel as a type of “rent”? It’s just extra effort for me to find the average historical expenses for those things and subtract them out.
Neuro, I thought better of you than to include a nominal price graph regarding Shiller.
If you look at the inflation adjusted Shiller data (available on his website), what you find is that while we have overshot the trendline, and are now about where a normal cyclical peak would typically be found.
Now would be a good time to exit if you are looking macro only, however, I wouldn’t be in a panic given the lack of development.
BTW, I take the recent return of the realtors to the board (ie. they have enough courage given headlines to stick their heads out of the sand) as an interesting contrarian piece of data.
The louder they yell “buy”, the faster you should be selling. The volume appears to just have started to be turned up…
Neuro, I thought better of you than to include a nominal price graph regarding Shiller.
Why? Because it doesn’t align with your distorted view as a result of a tragic financial mistake you made.
If you look at the inflation adjusted Shiller data (available on his website), what you find is that while we have overshot the trendline, and are now about where a normal cyclical peak would typically be found.
Wages today are right where they were 13 years ago. Resale housing prices are triple where they were 13 years ago.
Now would be a good time to exit if you are looking macro only, however, I wouldn’t be in a panic given the lack of development.
Given your massive debt obligation and stake in the direction of housing prices, your “advice” is toxic.
Any special reason, or is it just because you say now is the time to buy (which, by the way, is what Realtor®s always say)?
Its all about value. do you see value? Value can be in different forms.
I laugh at folks telling you to buy stocks at these prices. no value at all.
anyone have any idea where FED tax revenues have went over the past 5 years?
Do they continue to monetize debt so the govt can overspend?
$hitHouse Poet,
There is no value in paying 40% more than new construction prices for a 50 year old depreciating house.
you have no clue buddy. take your bs somewhere else for a few weeks. your rambling is getting you nowhere here.
SP,
Don’t take it personal as there is nothing personal about it.
Again….
Where is the value in paying a 40% premium over construction cost for a 50 year old house?
its not personal but me and others are tired of reading your bs here everyday.
You’re only speaking for your self $hithousePoet.
Again SP….
Where is the value in paying a 40% premium over construction cost for a 50 year old house?
its not personal but me and others are tired of reading your bs here everyday.
Install the Joshua Tree Extension. Rio posted a link to it the other day.
Yes. Please do so.
Thank you,
Management
Buying a house is always bad, even when done decades ago. Never is buying good. Never, Never, NEVER. Always bad. Always, always, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAAAYS, ALWAAAAYSZSSSSS!!!!!!!!!
Just that little bit of schooling made you that angry Donkey?
I’m not an economist, but as another poster noted, when interest rates rise, home prices rise too. So now is the time to buy a home and lock in a low interest rate at a low price.
“I’m not an economist, … when interest rates rise, home prices rise too.”
You are dumb as a board, though.
Our office mostly works with properties in the Inland Empire, but I could give you a referral if you’re considering buying in San Diego.
Thanks…we know plenty of realtors. The principle of one of our local firms occasionally goes door-to-door to drum up business, as the local market is as dead as a doornail.
And besides, I’m a looky-loo — not in the market.
“when interest rates rise, home prices rise too.”
That’s because the rise in the interest rate will make the monthly payment drop.
Taken to the extreme, if interest rates went to one hundred percent then the monthly payment would go to zero.
And … if the monthly payements went to zero then the value of houses would go to infinity.
I don’t know about all that complicated math, but we are showing homes in beautiful Moreno Valley, conveniently located within commuting distance of job centers in Los Angeles and San Diego.
“I don’t know about all that complicated math, but …”
If you are mathematically incompetent, aren’t you worried you might be encouraging your clients to make the financial investing error of a lifetime?
“I don’t know about all that complicated math …”
Well then let’s uncomplicate it. Let’s look at the other side of the statement “when interest rates rise, home prices rise too”:
If interest rates rise then the cost of borrowing money rises. If the cost of borrowing money is included in the monthly payments then the monthly payments will rise. If the monthly payments rise then people who cannot afford the risen monthly payment will drop out of the bidding of houses. If people drop out of the bidding of houses then in order to get one’s house sold he will have to drop the price to such a point where a bidder can come back into the market.
But there is another factor to consider, and this is the urgency factor. If people can be convinced that they should “buy now or be priced out forever” and rising interest rates will force them to be priced out forever then rising interest rates will impose on some of them the urgency factor and this urgency factor may induce some of them to enter the market.
It may not be a logical thing to do but nevertheless, there it is.
“It may not be a logical thing to do but nevertheless, there it is.”
And there is Uncle Sam trying his hardest to weaken prudential lending standards to the point where illogical and unqualified buyers can get into expensive homes with mortgage loans which are likely to result in a future foreclosure.
“I’m not an economist, but as another poster noted, when interest rates rise, home prices rise too.”
The “How much a month?” folks do not agree.
D&C 132
Polygamy supporters pleased that parts of Utah law are struck down
The district judge’s ruling on a lawsuit filed by Kody Brown of TV’s ‘Sister Wives’ effectively decriminalizes plural marriage in Utah. State officials might appeal the ruling.
Kody Brown and his wives, Janelle, Christine, Meri and Robyn, scored a victory in court on behalf of fundamentalist Mormons who believe polygamy will bring them rewards in heaven. (Bryant Livingston, Associated Press / May 22, 2010)
By John M. Glionna
December 17, 2013, 10:49 p.m.
LAS VEGAS — Advocates for so-called plural marriages are applauding a ruling by a U.S. District Court judge that struck down key segments of Utah’s anti-polygamy law, saying they violated constitutional rights to privacy and religious freedom.
In a 91-page decision issued Friday, Judge Clark Waddoups effectively decriminalized polygamy in Utah, ruling that a central phrase in the state’s law forbidding cohabitation with another person violated the 1st and 14th amendments.
The ruling, which distinguishes between polygamy and bigamy, was the result of a lawsuit filed in 2011 by Kody Brown, star of the reality series “Sister Wives,” now in its fourth season on cable TV’s TLC. Brown has four “wives” — who together have 17 children — but is legally married only to his first, Meri Brown.
Proponents say polygamist cohabitation among fundamentalist Mormons traditionally involves one marriage certificate; any additional wives represent religion-based relationships that are protected under the Constitution. They say the judge’s ruling has preserved laws against bigamy, which involves more than one marriage license.
…
Hats off to the guy who can manage a household with four wives. Just one is quite a challenge, IMO.
Whac-A-Bubble™ said: Hats off to the guy who can manage a household with four wives. Just one is quite a challenge, IMO.
If 2 dudes can get married why not 1 dude and 4 dudettes?
Because if they are Mormon, they are to be shunned.
They’re just TOO WEIRD don’t ‘cha know.
I suspect that is why a conservative Mormon attorney argued the gay right’s case to the Supreme Court and I said it at the time.
Yep. The handwriting for legal polygamy was on the wall once gay marriage was legalized.
Yep. The handwriting for legal polygamy was on the wall once gay marriage was legalized.
I’ve seen links to polyamory articles pop up in mainstream websites. I’ve also heard predictions that polygamy and group marriage will be legalized in this country by the end of the decade.
One thought that crosses my mind regarding plural marriages: The dynamics that would occur at the end of the day, when everyone tries to figure out who their bed buddy will be that night. That could be interesting.
I’ve also heard predictions that polygamy and group marriage will be legalized in this country by the end of the decade.
I am hoping for postmortem marriages, so that I can marry some dead billionaire and — PROFIT!
“I’ve also heard predictions that polygamy and group marriage will be legalized in this country by the end of the decade.”
More wives for the 1%!
Or 70 virgins for that matter?
“Or 70 virgins for that matter?”
What’s wrong with the seasoned talent?
Depends if you like seasoning…. or not.
What’s the real estate angle on this? Do the guy and his four wives all live in one house? If so, that could be another blow to household formation.
I can only imagine the environment where the four wives compete with each other for hubby’s attention.
That’s the part that interests me. I might actually try to earn a lot of money in order to experience that kind of competition.
That’s a great point. When you think about it, one guy and five wives is a much less expensive living arrangement on average than one guy and one wife. And it also frees up four guys to form two gay couples.
OK, so now we need to ban the practice of a man having children by more than one woman, with those children remaining eligible for public welfare benefits. Of course, we then need to also criminilize the practice of allowing older men to kick younger guys out of the community for the purpose of reducing competition for wives, thereby leaving the rest of society to deal with a bunch of underecuated boys who need to learn how to survive outside the cult. Oh, so that also means that we need to criminalize the practice of not sending your kids to public school, since the boys who get kicked out will need to have that education.
From IB Times:
China’s ban on its financial institutions handling bitcoin causes world’s largest exchange to cease trading, halving the value of the currency from $1,000 to less than $500 in a matter of days.
The country’s central bank took a hard line on bitcoin in early December when it banned financial institutions from handling the decentralised crypto-currency, and as a result BTC China, the world’s largest bitcoin exchange, has stopped accepting deposits from its users.
This action caused the value of bitcoin to plummet around the world, with Tokyo-based exchange Mt Gox seeing the currency fall as low as $480 (£294), from a record high of $1,200 at the start of December.
This is consistent with China having a plan to create the world’s reserve currency backed by gold. It wants its people to buy gold not bitcoin. It wants to replace the U.S. as the country with the reserve currency not have a new currency be developed. Meanwhile the U.S. is trying hard to suppress the price of gold. So Hu wins in this war? The question contains the answer. Obama backed down to Putin on the deployment of defense missiles in Eastern Europe and Syria. He backed down to Iran over enrichment accepting essentially the same deal he had rejected a year earlier. He backed down to Assad, even though not intervening was the right decision, saying you are going to do something and then not doing it is very bad. Thus, given his record of playing checkers when the big boys and girls know had to play chess, tells me he is going to lose this battle.
BTW, the ironic collateral damage to Obama’s gold suppression is the closing of gold mines throughout Southern Africa, especially in South Africa. The man motived by African leaders is destroying Southern Africa with his policies.
From today’s moneyweb:
A half-dozen unemployed workers from the Blyvooruitzicht (Blyvoor) gold mine southwest of Johannesburg finish off the last scraps of a slaughtered cow in the searing October heat. Since losing their jobs in August, meals have become much less predictable.
The men stand near a small wood fire as the sun shines off a hill of extracted earth, in sight of a housing block that was supposed to be vacated. One holds a jaw bone over the flame, nibbles the meat off, and tosses the rest into a rusty barrel. What’s left of the carcass with its entrails spilling out is starting to dry at their feet.
The scene, resembling something from an apocalypse film out of Hollywood, is an extreme example of the impact gold’s 25% drop this year may have on towns around the world that are dependent on the precious metal. Mining companies have announced plans to shutter mines or reduce operations from Nevada and Peru to Papua New Guinea in the Pacific Ocean, as gold heads toward its first annual loss in 13 years.
Blyvooruitzicht’s name means “happy prospect” in Afrikaans. These days that’s not such a sure thing. The mine’s most recent operator, Johannesburg-based Village Main Reef Ltd., cut funding and closed it last summer, letting go the remaining 1 700 workers. Plunging prices made it difficult to profitably extract gold, especially with electricity prices soaring and workers demanding higher wages.
No well-known mining companies have shown an interest in the mine, though this month buyers have surfaced, according to one of the liquidators.
Interesting back in 2000 mines were still profitable at $250 oz now so many are unprofitable at $1250 oz.
Have we dug up all the cheap gold in the world?
Yes.
Has the acquisition cost of gold claims changed, and is that factored into the cost of mining?
I’ll know that the country is somewhat back to normal when the “cash for gold” kiosks disappear from the shopping malls.
Did you buy Bitcoin at the top?
I never bought bitcoin.
Bitcoin halves in value after China exchange halts yuan deposits
December 18, 2013, 6:37 AM
High atop Mt. Gox on Wednesday, it was getting uglier by the moment. While New York was asleep, bitcoin on that exchange was slid below $500, dropping to a low of $455. While the virtual currency is rising back over that $500 level, it’s still worth roughly half it was on Dec. 11, when it traded around the $1,000 level.
…
“…around the $1,000 level.”
I thought it topped out around $1200, but then what’s a 20% premium to a reckless gambler?
I guess it’s not surprising that China is the most popular place for Bitcoin.
http://www.infowars.com/feinstein-youre-not-a-real-journalist-unless-you-draw-a-salary/
Dec. 18, 2013, 9:21 a.m. EST
Ford shares slide on lowered 2014 outlook
By Mike Ramsey
NEW YORK– Ford Motor Co. said its pretax earnings for 2013 would be $8.5 billion, and 2014 profit would be between $7 billion and $8 billion.
Ford’s pretax margin in North America for the year will be between 9.5% and 10%, lower than expected, because of up to $300 million in warranty expenses caused by engine recalls.
Ford also lowered the amount of cash it would require to fund pension plans by about 50% over the next several years because of progress on pension funding and better discount rates.
…
the pensions and union will bury them.
The collapse of the middle class and people not being able to afford cars will bury them. Henry Ford is stomping his feet in heaven.
The collapse of the middle class and the fact that fewer and fewer will be able to afford and drive and F150 will bury them. Henry Ford is pulling his hair out in heaven. It’s so simple.
‘(Reuters) - Western nations have indicated to the Syrian opposition that peace talks next month may not lead to the removal of President Bashar al-Assad and that his Alawite minority will remain key in any transitional administration, opposition sources said.’
‘The message, delivered to senior members of the Syrian National Coalition at a meeting of the anti-Assad Friends of Syria alliance in London last week, was prompted by rise of al Qaeda and other militant groups, and their takeover of a border crossing and arms depots near Turkey belonging to the moderate Free Syrian Army, the sources told Reuters.’
“Our Western friends made it clear in London that Assad cannot be allowed to go now because they think chaos and an Islamist militant takeover would ensue,” said one senior member of the Coalition who is close to officials from Saudi Arabia.’
So 100,000 people die in this little interventionist experiment, and for nothing.
So?
Human beings ARE the problem, remember? They must be, else PETA would be raising holy h@ll right now.
Well-calculated violence and murder are always a plus, especially when sanctioned by a Messiah.
MIC people are genius. They need likes of Assad around so that we keep on spending on our “defense.”
+1
2,380 servicemen/women have died in Iraq and Afghanistan since Obama’s first day in office.
Apparently, these lives are less important than those lost prior to Obama’s election. ‘Nary a mention of them.
Funny how that works.
People mention it all the time. For instance, you mentioned it just now. The sticky thing about wars (conflicts, interventions, whatever) is that you can’t decide to just stop whenever you change Presidents. You become embroiled in the situation. And you can’t lump Iraq in with Afghanistan.
I don’t see it mentioned all the time. What do you watch where it gets mentioned all the time?
Yeah, I’d like to see the breakout between Iraq and Afghanistan, too. I haven’t yet found a source that provides the breakout.
It’s mostly Afghanistan….that’s why they don’t want to break down the numbers.
Just remember Afghani was/is a GOOD war according to some people in one party.
Hope it shows correctly.
year Afghani Iraqstan
2001 7
2002 30
2003 33 486
2004 49 849
2005 93 846
2006 88 823
2007 111 904
2008 153 314
2009 310 149
2010 496 60
2011 412 54
2012 301 1
2013 109
Exactly. Assad’s oil field are in the hands of the worse Islamic militants but he does not move to take them back. Why? Because that battle would leave him weaker and almost as importantly leave the Islamists weaker. He attacks the FSA areas whenever possible. He has worked very hard to make the situation be: it is either him or the Islamists. I doubt that if we would have intervened when McCain wanted intervention we would have helped a secular government come to power but by the fall of this year it was too late. Why Obama was even talking about bombing, then, is beyond me.
Of course because we walk away does not mean that peace comes to the region. The Islamists have set up bases both in Iraq and Syria. The Saudi’s and the Gulf states have a reason to support them and continue to let their crazies go there to die. The war will get even more bloody if Assad feels strong enough to try to reclaim territory from them.
chaos and an Islamist militant takeover would ensue
no matter what the West decides to do (with one unlikely exception), due to the locality’s overabundance of wannabe dictators and their true believers of whatever persuasion, combined with dismal economic prospects. The exception would be a vicious re-colonization of the area with continuing, decades-long suppression of whoever opposes it. No Western electorate would put up with that any more.
Where did this crazy idea that middle eastern dictatorships can be easily and quickly transformed into Jeffersonian democracies come from? It’s not remotely realistic.
I blame Bush.
Scientists (gay socialists) report 2013 hottest year on record:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/12/17/november-2013-hottest-on-record/
B-b-b-but it snowed somewhere. Hurry, post some Drudge links!
That is ground based data that is easy to fabricate in third world sh*t holes the satellite data showed the temperatures almost .4 F cooler. That is what I have been talking about for about a week. The AGW crowd is now so desperate they have resorted to fabricating data.
Dan:
Why are you so dedicated to believing that the Earth is getting cooler? What is it about the scientific data, collected over the past 100-odd years, that bothers you so much?
I really do not have any problem with the hundred year old data. Nor do I question that we have had warming. The most active sun over a period of seventy years in thousands of years will do that. What I do question is data coming from third world countries that want billions of dollars in aid and which conflicts with data from satellites. I posted the link, now they use Celsius so you need to convert but once you do you will see a .4F difference between the data sets. The ground base data has been running hot for sometime but it is getting worse every year. Why rely on it when we have more accurate satellite data?
http://www.space.com/484-sunspot-activity-8-000-year-high.html
Now the scientists in this article claim that this activity could not have caused the warming but we have learned a lot since 2004 on how clouds seeded by cosmic rays impact temperatures and how this is more common during low solar activity so while the data is correct, their conclusions may not be.
“Why are you so dedicated”
The 1%ers and especially the 0.1%ers who run the oil and gas biz are making too much money today to give a sh*t what happens 50 years or a century from now. They sell climate change denial in a number of ways:
American Exceptionalism - energy use is a right and a freedom, no French-speaking commie in the UN is going to tell me I can’t drive my Hummer to the McDonalds drive-thru.
Gender / Sexuality - energy efficiency is effeminate and/or homosexual. American masculinity is displayed by amount of energy consumed (see also exceptionalism).
Christianity / Capitalism - belief that God will take care of the planet, that humans are God’s pets, when in reality the root of the problem is too many humans. Capitalism i.e. growth for growth’s sake, the same purpose of a cancer cell. Belief that infinite growth within a finite ecosystem is not only possible, but preferable.
Sorry none of those apply. I do not believe in the present AGW theory since the data does not much the theory. We should be almost 2 F degrees warmer if co2 had the impact that the theory states. The AGW even knows it and that is why we had climategate a few years ago when they tried to cover up the pause and silence anyone that pointed out that the globe was not getting warmer. Sorry AGW is a bad religion at this point and not science. A good scientific theory should accurately predict what will happen and this theory could not be more inaccurate.
Some of those oil and gas executives are probably concerned about the planet that their grandchildren will inherit. Unfortunately, if they were to act on those concerns, they’d be fired and the very nice salary and benefits would be gone. In Wall Street lingo they have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize profits. This is part of the nature of the corporation.
And yet the glaciers and ice caps continue to melt.
No actually that is not true. We had increases in ice at both poles this year.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/16/nature-proves-al-gore-wrong-again/
No actually that is not true. We had increases in ice at both poles this year.
But what about the long term trend? Is there more ice than 10 years ago? A single year blip is just that, a blip.
“what about the long term trend”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retreat_of_glaciers_since_1850
But what about the long term trend? Is there more ice than 10 years ago? A single year blip is just that, a blip.
Yes but we do not have a single year. Ice around the south pole has been increasing for decades offsetting the decline in the Arctic. Global warming should warm both poles. However, warming caused by the AMO (a natural cycle) would only cause warming in the Arctic and that is what we see. Actually, that is all we see since all attention is focused by the PTB in places which support warming. It may be bad science but it supports both global government and a transfer of money from the developed countries to the poor countries so we will be arguing about this even if most everyone can see we are in a mini-ice age.
Bought and paid for by Koch:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial
And now back to your regularly scheduled Drudge Report links …
What is your evidence that the satellite data is incorrect? Never mind the game of attacking who is reporting it.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/16/nature-proves-al-gore-wrong-again/
From an article that is about to post. We have more sea ice now than the average from 1979 and it is all melting?
Global sea ice area is 0.669 million square kilometers above the 1979-current average:
Bought and paid for by Koch:
I remember in the early days that the biz community tried to say that global warming was a good thing, until the scientific community began to point out the hazards associated with it. Then they switched gears and began the denial campaign.
I remember when science use to demand some accuracy.
And I’m too young to remember a time when humanity or the global ecosystem had a future.
Enjoy the die-off
Enjoy the die-off
Humanity won’t go away, but after the dust settles there will be a lot fewer peeps, especially in the more impoverished parts of the third world.
My real concern is that idiots will start firing off nukes when nations battle each other over precious and scarce resources, like food, energy and fresh water.
remember a time when X had a future
The “future” is imaginary. Predictions that prove true are rare. “Harold Camping, radio host who predicted world’s end, dies at 92″
Dan was arguing that cigarettes were good for you in the 70’s
Nice try wrong but nice try. I am entirely driven by data. When and if, the data ever matches the theory I will believe. However, I have disputed the theory on this board for about 6 years and my predictions on what would happen to the climate has been far more accurate than the theory. BTW, we may have an el nino in 2014 so it may be a warm year after that you better have an electric blanket.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/atmosphere/atmospheric-oscillation/
Here’s what I don’t get about the climate change stuff; nobody is doing anything about it. We have these 10 year plans, that get put off because China needs a little more growth, or India. I’m sure we’ve all seen the smog in China on TV. The biggest restraint on global pollution was the one child policy in China, and it’s gone now. Here comes half a billion exhaust-belching Chinese cars.
“nobody is doing anything about it”
Because nothing can or will be done about it. The only solution is voluntary reduction of childbirth and energy consumption, and that will never happen at a scale to have any impact.
that get put off because China needs a little more growth, or India.
Let’s be honest here if western world is all too happy to outsource any manufacturing to China, China will NOT have to abide by any carbon emission laws and such. That’s only fair.
Western world has to decide if it wants clean pristine air and no jobs or jobs but occasional brown smug.
‘Obama, to sell trade pacts, will outline the benefits of globalization’
‘After months of international negotiations over two new trade treaties, the Obama administration is planning a major push to make the case that the agreements will put Americans to work at a decent wage and not further winnow the country’s manufacturing base.’
‘European and U.S. negotiators are in Washington this week to continue work on an agreement that would mesh the world’s two largest economies more closely together. A second proposed treaty, the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), may be finished early next year, creating a trade zone covering 40 percent of world economic output and reaching from Chile to Japan.’
We have these 10 year plans, that get put off because China needs a little more growth, or India.
And that’s the thing. We will sacrifice the world to boost the bottom line. Of course, most of us will be dead by the time the SHTF, so party on Garth!
“most of us will be dead”
I plan to be, so I will party on Garth indeed. And because I give such a sh*t about the environment and your children’s future, I’m going to drive 150 miles round trip to ride up chairlifts powered by burning coal to ski on snow that won’t be there in a hundred years. And I’m gonna do it again and again this year, specifically: 4 days at Loveland, 4 days at Arapahoe Basin, 2 days at Winter Park, and 2 days at Monarch.
Because nothing can or will be done about it. The only solution is voluntary reduction of childbirth and energy consumption, and that will never happen at a scale to have any impact.
Not true goon
There’s war famine and disease that will do the trick. People will continue to get poorer and poorer and angrier and angrier.
Dude we totally need to do something about this global warming!!
USA TODAY
5:25 p.m. EST December 10, 2013
“There’s cold, and then there’s Antarctica cold. … How does a frosty reading of 135.8 degrees below zero sound? Based on remote satellite measurements, scientists recently recorded that temperature at a desolate ice plateau in East Antarctica. It was the lowest temperature ever recorded on Earth. A NASA satellite measured that temperature in August 2010; on July 31 of this year, another bone-chilling temperature of -135.3 degrees was recorded.”
By the way even that data did not claim that 2013 was the hottest on record, it will not be, it stated that November was the hottest November on record quite a difference between the two.
Thanks for all the clicks and advertising page loads, Dannyboy!
I know you can’t refute the information. It is over AGW is the newest hoax on science.
Keep on breeding and keep burning gas and oil, Koch needs your money.
http://science.time.com/2013/05/13/why-a-hotter-world-will-mean-more-extinctions/
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/09/05/business/energy-environment/wildfires-and-climate-change.html
http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2012/09/majority-of-coral-reefs-will-be-damaged-by-2030-due-to-rising-greenhouse-gases/
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21534-oceans-acidifying-at-unprecedented-speed.html
Mike Whitney’s latest:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/12/17/did-someone-say-crash/
B-b-b-but that’s unpossible. I waited 2 hours for a table at Applebee’s last night!
I think he meant to say;
KEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEYRAAAAAAAAAAAAAASH!!!!
Whitney and Mark Hanson are truly pro’s.
Sleepless:
Regarding your question last night, I was talking about the Tor network. You can download the Tor browser bundle through torproject org, with the usual punctuation.
Thanks. For some reason, I thought it had to do with PHP or some other acronym that I remember researching but didn’t save…Private PNP or some such?
Maybe it was someone else. I don’t remember posting anything like that, but I don’t always commit everything to memory that I write on this blog.
http://www.thestar.com/business/2013/12/18/investors_own_less_than_a_quarter_of_toronto_condominiums_cmhc.html
25% owner-investors is still a lot!
Netflix just posted the trailer for its Mitt Romney documentary.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/trailer-for-netflix-romney-doc-takes-you-inside-mitt-s-concession
Looks boring.
This looks much better and more insightful to what DC and politics are about these days: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFhJjCmYi1M#t=35 (Easily the best show on TV, except it’s not available on TV. LOL @ cable payers.)
Canada’s real estate bubble is being pumped up by, well we all know by who.
http://www.rosskay.com/november-national-solds-over-reported.html
Got to love the FED and market manipulation
We will cut back on buying treasuries but our target for interest rates will remain lower than previously promised. See you can have your cake and eat it too. Goldman Sachs market manipulating programs were used to gas the markets, remember when the collapsed at the first hint of a cutback. 1+1 is 3 . See no problems here.
To infinity and beyond.
As I said around the office today: The Fed just announced no more 4 martini lunches.
They cut it down to 3.5 martinis for a while.
The market was concerned that they would cut it to 2 martinis, and then go cold turkey within 6 months.
That seems less likely now…party on.
Oh I love the smell of monopoly in the morning.
Despite filling your shopping cart with dozens of brands every week, your grocery-store experience is being controlled by an increasingly small handful of big companies. That lack of diversity, says a new report from advocacy group Food & Water Watch, is preventing competition and keeping prices higher.
You may see dozens of different brands when you walk down the cereal or drinks aisle, but the reality is most categories are ruled by a couple corporate giants. Food & Water Watch examined 100 grocery categories, finding that 63.3% of sales were controlled by the biggest food companies. Kellogg (K), General Mills (GIS), Post (POST) and Pepsico (PEP) sell almost 50 different types of cereal and own nearly 80% of all cereal sales. Mondelez International’s (MDLZ) Philadelphia brand accounts for almost 61% of cream cheese sales. In everything from sports drinks to baby formula and granola bars, Food & Water Watch found that generally only two to four companies control the bulk of market share.
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/
how–big-grocery–is-starting-to-bite-consumers-174111863.html
Dec. 18, 2013, 12:01 a.m. EST
Doomsday poll: still a 98% risk of 2014 stock crash
Commentary: Psychological realities as new year dawns end irrational exuberance
Stories You Might Like
Home construction hits fastest pace since 2008
Gold volatile as traders assess Fed taper news
By Paul B. Farrell, MarketWatch
SAN LUIS OBISPO, Calif. (MarketWatch) — Yes, “Doomsday poll: 98% risk of 2014 stock crash” was my midyear headline. And yes, it still fits. Why? Because in the new year, after the irrational exuberance of the “Christmas rally” passes, reality will set in.
Remember the dark warnings from last January through the fall? Fed even saw an “unsustainable bubble” … Bill Gross: “Credit Supernova” … Jeffrey Gundlach: “Kaboom Ahead” … Charlie Ellis: “Don’t own bonds” … Gary Shilling: “Shocker” … Nouriel Roubini: “Prepare for perfect storm” … Peter Schiff “doubling down” on his “doomsday” prediction … InvestmentNews’s warning to 90,000 advisers: “Tick, tick … boom!”
…
How many more years will pass before this guy’s stopped-clock crash prediction comes true?
There have been a couple of interesting developments in labor markets…I’m interested in people’s views:
1. The Philly Fed just put out a paper that noted that the reason for a shrinking labor force since 2012 has mainly been retirement. Mish (another blogger) did a deep dive on this claim recently, and corroborated the claim.
This shouldn’t be a surprise based on demographics. What this means is that with even weak job growth (less than 200k per month), we can have decreasing unemployment rates.
2. Barry Ritholtz just put posted an article on Bloomberg (”Better News on Workforce Dropouts: Ritholtz Chart”) noting that the number of people “not in the labor force, but want a job” has decreased substantially quite recently. While the number is still historically high, it is down substantially from the peak of the credit crisis, and now at the high end of the range generally seen from the late 90’s to 2006/2007. We’ll see if it goes back up, or starts to come down further.
In other words, there are fewer people officially outside of the labor force who might want to officially re-enter the labor force.
3. From the JOLTs survey, the number of “quits” (the number of people voluntarily leaving their job) is now as high as it’s been since 2008. Looking at year to October numbers, the trend continues to increase. After collapsing to 18.2 MM quits in 2009 (January through October; a decrease of 33% from the year before), it rose by 4% in 2010, a further 6% in 2011, a further 8% in 2012, and a further 9% in 2013.
People don’t quit if they didn’t already find (or couldn’t find) another job.
My take on these things combined is that the labor market is looking better than the flat wages might otherwise indicate. If these trends continue, at what point are wages positively impacted?
I read some other article saying that the biggest reason for labor nonparticipation was millennials staying in school way too long. I sure wish I had that link now. There was a survey involved.
Why work when the govt will give you everything you need for free?
25 MILLION excess, empty and defaulted houses CHECK
Housing demand at 14 year lows and falling CHECK
Housing prices inflated by 250% CHECK
Household formation at multi decade lows CHECK
Rampant housing fraud CHECK
Public denial formed and supported by a corrupt media CHECK
Population growth the lowest in US history CHECK
Immigration flat to slightly negative CHECK
Oh my word……
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101283037
Yellin and her 17 academic papers will disagrre with that notion.
YOLO!
Whatever happened to peak oil?
December 18, 2013
“WASHINGTON, D.C. – Five years ago, U.S. crude oil production seemed destined to commence a long-term slide downward, but this week, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) projected that in 2016, U.S. crude oil production will hit record highs not seen in more than 40 years, the Financial Times reports.
The reversal comes after the EIA significantly revised its estimates for future U.S. crude oil production to around 9.5 million barrels daily in 2016, which would close in on the record high of 9.6 million barrels per day reached in 1970. The EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook pointed to advances in hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling that accessed oil and gas reserves not available in the past as driving the increase.
The 2012 prediction had U.S. crude production reaching around 7.5 million barrels a day by the decade’s second half, but that level has already been passed. The shale boom has placed the United States behind only China as the world’s biggest net oil importer, which in turn pressures OPEC. Now, the EIA forecasts U.S. crude production will taper off at a slow pace starting in 2020, but added that speculation of the future is very uncertain.”
I THOUGHT YOU WERE BANNED.
Banned for posting about record oil production? Dude, get a grip.
Atlanta real estate investmenting sux.
“Whatever happened to peak oil?”
It doesn’t exist. It never has.
I thought I dispelled this peak oil myth over a year ago?
Former Top NSA Official: “We Are Now In A Police State”
Washington’s Blog
December 18, 2013
Bill Binney is the high-level NSA executive who created the agency’s mass surveillance program for digital information. A 32-year NSA veteran widely regarded as a “legend” within the agency, Binney was the senior technical director within the agency and managed thousands of NSA employees.
Binney has been interviewed by virtually all of the mainstream media, including CBS, ABC, CNN, New York Times, USA Today, Fox News, PBS and many others.
Last year, Binney held his thumb and forefinger close together, and said:
We are, like, that far from a turnkey totalitarian state.
But today, Binney told Washington’s Blog that the U.S. has already become a police state.
By way of background, the government is spying on virtually everything we do.
All of the information gained by the NSA through spying is then shared with federal, state and local agencies, and they are using that information to prosecute petty crimes such as drugs and taxes. The agencies are instructed to intentionally “launder” the information gained through spying, i.e. to pretend that they got the information in a more legitimate way … and to hide that from defense attorneys and judges.
This is a bigger deal than you may realize, as legal experts say that there are so many federal and state laws in the United States, that no one can keep track of them all … and everyone violates laws every day without even knowing it.
The NSA also ships Americans’ most confidential, sensitive information to foreign countries like Israel(and here), the UK and other countries … so they can “unmask” the information and give it back to the NSA … or use it for their own purposes.
Binney told us today:
The main use of the collection from these [NSA spying] programs [is] for law enforcement. [See the 2 slides below].
These slides give the policy of the DOJ/FBI/DEA etc. on how to use the NSA data. In fact, they instruct that none of the NSA data is referred to in courts – cause it has been acquired without a warrant.
So, they have to do a “Parallel Construction” and not tell the courts or prosecution or defense the original data used to arrest people. This I call: a “planned programed perjury policy” directed by US law enforcement.
And, as the last line on one slide says, this also applies to “Foreign Counterparts.”
This is a total corruption of the justice system not only in our country but around the world. The source of the info is at the bottom of each slide. This is a totalitarian process – means we are now in a police state.
Here are the two slides which Binney pointed us to:
(Source: Reuters via RT)
We asked Binney a follow-up question:
You say “this also applies to ‘Foreign Counterparts.’” Does that mean that foreign agencies can also “launder” the info gained from NSA spying? Or that data gained through foreign agencies’ spying can be “laundered” and used by U.S. agencies?
Binney responded:
For countries like the five eyes (US, Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand) and probably some others it probably works both ways. But for others that have relationships with FBI or DEA etc., they probably are given the data to used to arrest people but are not told the source or given copies of the data.
(See this for background on the five eyes.)
View past discussions between Washington’s Blog and Binney here, here, here and here.
This article was posted: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 at 5:59 am
Tags: domestic news, domestic spying, foreign affairs, police state
This is why no one should ever use Obamacare or any other type of insurance to visit a doctor. Pay with cash and try not to sign anything if you don’t have to.
The last time I went to the doctor, they asked me about every detail of my personal life, including my “religious or spiritual beliefs”. Then they asked a lot of offensive questions, basically to determine whether or not I am a person of questionable moral character.
I asked if I could fill out the special form that is required to request that the doctor not share my health information with anyone but me, but they didn’t actually have a form. Their HIPPA notice refers to the form, but there is no form. I had to write my request down on a sheet of paper, and they acted like I was the one who was crazy. The HIPPA notice clearly states that they don’t have to honor your request to maintain your privacy. They can give your information to “foreign heads of state” if they want to. It is soooooo Big Brother.