Bits Bucket for February 9, 2014
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
A personal email I just received contains the following statement, and I was wondering if anyone on the HBB could translate it from Realtorspeak® into English for me?
“We have a closing date on 2/27 for the house we are leasing to purchase.”
Does this suggest the ‘we’ in question is about to commence a series of monthly payments leading up to a future purchase of the house in question, or did something get lost for me in translation?
If my interpretation is correct, then would anyone in their right mind choose to do this, and why?
the house will not be worth a continental soon so the contract will be null and void.
They “lease” it at a fixed price for a certain period of time. At the end of the “lease” period, they gain the first right of refusal to purchase the house at some number that was agreed upon in the original contract.
Buyers do this because they don’t have a down payment or good enough credit to get a mortgage right now, and they think that the price of the house will be higher later (higher than the contract price). Would-be sellers do this because they can trick fools into paying a much higher-than-normal rental rate, and they don’t think the market price of the house will be going up. That way, if the buyer chooses not to exercise their option at the end of the lease, then the would-be-seller still made out pretty well on the rent.
What if the buyer already owns three houses free and clear, like my sister and her husband do. Would there be any sane reason to enter this kind of a contract in that case?
P.S. Their credit is impeccable; they are net worth positive with household income far in excess of their expenses.
If you are going to throw money down the real estate investment rathole, isn’t it better to do it from a debt than an equity position? So far as I am aware, there is no way to walk away from your vanished equity.
does your credit matter once u own your assets outright and have no plans for major purchases?
“…does your credit matter once u own your assets outright…”
You may have missed my point, which was that my sister & BIL’s motivation for entering the lease-purchase contract has nothing whatsoever to do with inability to qualify for a loan. My guess is that they are locking in an option to buy at current future prices on the presumption that actual appreciation will be much higher than the owner realizes. (Mind you that this household bought a place in December 2006 at a $50K premium to what a flipper bought it for a few months earlier.)
Then your sister and her husband must be of the opinion that house prices are going to the moon. They probably think they’re getting a discount. They only sent you that e-mail to tick you off. Your wife should make them a fruitcake and send it in the mail as a “housewarming gift”. For revenge.
History might show they were right. I base this on the observation that a good share of the Fed’s recent $4 trillion balance sheet expansion went into propping up U.S. housing prices through mortgage-backed securities purchases, and I see no evidence the Fed plans to ever unwind this position.
It’s frustrating to see people who are utterly clueless about finance being able to make a fortune off dumb investments. Even worse is to contemplate how many all-cash Chinese and Canadian investors are enriching themselves off the Fed’s housing price support scheme.
In defense of my sister’s motives, she is not the type who would let inform me about her real estate investing activities merely to get under my skin. Rather she was explaining why she doesn’t have any free time to take online courses like I have. It seems this real estate investing activity is a big time drain that households who get hooked into it seem to underestimate before it is too late.
It seems this real estate investing activity is a big time drain
Shocking.
“…and they don’t think the market price of the house will be going up.”
Nor do I.
Lease/Options are very common in commercial real estate transactions…Not so much in residential…
Living in a rental will never feel like a real home.
Owning four houses will always feel like stupido.
u tip the landlord this month?
We probably owe them something, as they recently sunk maybe $10K into a couple of outdoor projects, including an overhaul of the 30-year-old sprinkler system plus a complete facelift of the backyard landscaping. Evidently they are doing this with a plan to get the house ready to sell next year. I suppose we should devise a contingency plan, just in case contagion from the EM panic doesn’t end up tanking the Echo Bubble before they manage to offload their investment property.
Owning four houses will always feel like stupido ??
I got to know a Greek guy that ended up with 22 single family homes accumulated over his lifetime…Never sold any…Just kept buying..Always fixer’s…Always entry level in decent area in close proximity to where he lived…Self taught how to do the work in all trades…Well before he passed away he owned all free & clear..About midway his cash flow was so great the next acquisition was not only easy but he would retire loans in like 5 years…Lockeed Engineer…Wonderful Gentleman..
Nothing wrong with that if you have nothing better to do in your spare time than maintain 22 separate properties. I guess if you really did it right, you could hire a manager at some point to maintain your mini-Trump empire.
I guess if you really did it right, you could hire a manager at some point ??
Old school Greek….Stay at home spouse handled all paper work etc…
Nothing wrong with that if you have nothing better to do in your spare time than maintain 22 separate properties ??
I got to know him pretty well…Yes, he seemed to be working a lot of nights and weekends but not quite as much as one would suspect…He did not have a lot of short tenant turn-over…Tenants seemed to stay for many years…I think it was a combination of keeping his rents below market and being a really nice landlord…
I would also mention that he retired quite early from Lockeed..I want to say very early fifties…Started their right out of college…So after retirement, and still being relatively young he had a lot more free time to deal with the rentals…
If I remember correctly he was still buying through his fifties maybe into his early sixties…
Yeah- can you imagine how much time 22 properties would take to maintain?
Tens of thousands a month in depreciation .
Wow. Amazing he could afford to retire after losing all that depreciation.
Slaving over 22 depreciating houses is retirement?
Really?
Slaving over 22 depreciating houses is retirement?
More like a career change.
But if the houses really were paid off, the cash-flow should easily have supported hiring someone else to do maintenance, if he had a desire to do less of it.
Slumlords make the most money. If that’s what there is to aspire to in the “profession”- NO THANKS.
“Living in a rental will never feel like a real home”
With the demographic situation of boomers dying off and fewer high income people to buy, owning a house will be as sensible driving a Boeing 757 2 miles to work.
To be fair, when the boomers die off their assets go to their children who will suddenly be much wealthier. The money may even be spent more liberally (easier to spend money you did not have to earn), so mass boomer die offs may actually bolster consumption.
Whigh still results in an additional 35 million excess empty houses.
The Boomers aren’t leaving anything to their kids. They’re spending it all, and putting reverse mortgages on their houses.
I’m nearing 55 and spending my money now. No one to leave it to. My luxuries so far include airplane trips, airplane club lounge memberships, $100 red wines. I’m still mostly frugal otherwise.
In four years and ten months I can start distributions, but will probably wait another five. Gonna do more traveling, rent fine cars, move up my workout club membership to Lifetime Fitness from LA Fitness - much better fitness swimming pools at Lifetime. Lets’ see - more quality medical care like I’m doing, better quality organic foods and so on.
My goal is still a quality rental SFH in central Scottsdale for eight months of the year and 4 months VRBO in Big Sur or the high mountains during the time the Phoenix area is awfully hot.
“Going in style” but with good quality of life and focus on more quality workouts and nutrition. Good health can cost extra bucks.
“The Boomers aren’t leaving anything to their kids. They’re spending it all, and putting reverse mortgages on their houses.”
Wait a minute. I thought the talking point was that they’re ‘Generation Greed’ and hoarding wealth and assets, and us Gen X’ers and everybody after us got screwed? Me head hurts from trying to keep all the memes straight.
No we boomers are supposed to be generation greed.
There is nothing immoral about keeping your own property which you earned. If that’s greed then I guess you must want to move to equal outcome-obsessed France.
Boomers age range covers almost a generation. People born between 1946 and 1964.
The collectivistic people who love to pigeonhole others and give the others traits that they don’t even have don’t even think of the vast age range of the boomers.
I can certainly tell you, someone born in 1963 is very different than someone born in 1947.
Gen-Xers are also almost a whole generation, born between the mid 60s and early 80s.
I wonder if the Gen y folks will pigeonhole the Gen-xers as an entire group? I would also think someone born in 1965 is very different than someone born in 1983.
I wonder if the Gen y folks will pigeonhole the Gen-xers as an entire group?
Already happening. Same as everyone does to the boomers.
“I can certainly tell you, someone born in 1963 is very different than someone born in 1947.”
That is true but as someone born in the mid 60’s to a WW2 vet with siblings born in the 40’s and 50’s, it might surprise you how similar our lives are.
With the demographic situation of boomers dying off and fewer high income people to buy, owning a house will be as sensible driving a Boeing 757 2 miles to work.
Beautiful.
I probably shouldn’t rant so much about my sister’s real estate investing activities, as they are hardly unique. So let me move on to my cousin, whose wife has some close relatives they recently visited in Austin, TX. Said relatives own a mini-Trump real estate empire consisting of maybe four large homes around the Austin area. My (finance professor) cousin expressed sheer amazement at the amount of real estate these self-styled moguls have amassed.
Maybe my family is just unusually eager to own real estate, but I can’t help but suspect these two anecdotes heard within the past few days through the family grapevine are symptomatic of a widespread contagious episode of real estate investing fever that will lead many American households the way to the poor farm. Thank you, Ben Bernanke, for showing us the path to riches.
Did you ever bring up demographics of declining number of highly educated productive workers to keep the house prices inflated?
My first cousin who related this story to me last week is just as incredulous as I am about the number of amateur investors who are venturing into ownership of individual housing units as a wealth creation strategy. There is no need to discuss the risks of loss with him, as he is a finance professor (and not the investor).
(reposted from the topic thread)
We got another picture in from Mz. Crateron’s space trip the other day. Here, she is depicted standing in one of the craters that she discovered on the moon:
http://www.picpaste.com/Crater_Donkey-WSZsCWIR.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ZKJ5Od35DhY/TdKikGreiII/AAAAAAAAAE4/7riZKuNL-8E/s1600/eeyore2launch.jpg
the denarius was debased to just 5% of its original silver content.
I think we just received our answer on the direction of the economy. The White House clearly believes that the economy will be in bad shape for the November election. This is not due to anything they are saying for public consumption but what they are doing. They are taking actions to have the focus of the election on gay rights. For decades the social wedge issues have been used to divert people from focusing on the impact of globalization. Thus, this is not the first administration to use this strategy. However, because of their dismal economic record they have had to resort to it more often.
who do republicans have left to help them win elections?
You we see that in November when they increase their majority status in the House and make a real run at Senate control. In a word they have taxpayers.
do public workers pay taxes?
Dan - the Repubs are losing their numbers still.
I see many first and second generations Asian Americans vote Democrat here.
Demographically there are more people born in FSA households than in responsible households and this has been going on for two generations.
Even if many young people are sorry they had the white guilt and voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012 they have been replaced by the larger numbers in the FSA.
Nothing we can do except scramble to find ways to cut our own taxes (the direct approach).
For years I used a legal scheme to have a single percent tax rate at federal, state, and local. For the next five years it’s double digit. Probably 30%, but I had a federal and state combined rate of 9% without having a MID or any dependents.
I cannot say what this scheme is because the more it becomes common, the more likely “progressives” and government will shut this scheme down. But Congress uses this tax avoidance scheme too, from what someone else told me.
“Dan - the Repubs are losing their numbers still.”
Of course they are, they’ve morphed into the worst of both worlds. Socially conservative and fiscally “deficits don’t matter” liberal. Why the f*ck would I want to vote for that garbage? They’re going the WRONG way.
The Republican Party mainstream is retarded to not realize this. They are driving their party down the toilet and have a stupid puppy dog (Odie of Garfield) outlook that people will become social conservative, hawkish, and in favor of big business eventually.
By committing party suicide, of course the Democrapic FSA party will become permanent majority. But the Democraps are disastrous too. When they become permanent majority they will only fall by massive withdrawal of consent by the rest of the population. That will be the revolution.
I guess maybe it is good of the Republicans to take themselves out so the Democraps will be left to blame and the revolution will be against the Democrapic party in charge. It will be the much needed revolution against “progressivism.”
I think a revolution by the responsible outside the ballot box will happen within a generation, should the percentage of those favorable of government drop a tad further. It will be a combination of civil disobedience, state nullification of federal laws, and withholding of consent. Part of that will be a big drop in revenue to the government as the social security crisis worsens.
Hopefully this will all be nonviolent. Rest easy that there are a lot of government employees who understand who pays the bills and understand the constitution and will go on our side.
Voting only sanctions the system. Besides, the election mechanics are built to quickly remove dissenters from winning elections, as we saw happened to Ron Paul. So change will not happen through voting.
It will be a combination of civil disobedience, state nullification of federal laws
Ummm… IANAL, but if I remember correctly, this would require a regime change on the Supreme Court. Federal law currently trumps state law.
Ted Cruz.
who do republicans have left to help them win elections?
Nothing.
But why should we care? And I’m by no means a Democrat, never voted for a Democrat, and quit voting anyway.
“For decades the social wedge issues have been used to divert people from focusing on the impact of globalization. Thus, this is not the first administration to use this strategy. However, because of their dismal economic record they have had to resort to it more often.”
Ah, yes, the neo-con wing of the pub party was expert at using social wedge issues, like abortion and Terry Schiavo and other stuff. You might even say that 9/11 was one of the biggest. social wedge. issues. ever.
Shell games.
I think we just received our answer on the direction of the economy ??
Weak and likely will remain weak…The single biggest concern that effects everyone is China…
The China slowdown is contained. Besides, the U.S. economy is decoupled from the BRICs.
I don’t think so Pbear….China crisis is real…question is how will it play out…
Omitted the sarcasm tags on that post…sorry.
Revolution.
Speaking of social wedge issues, didn’t someone post a couple of days ago about the dying MSM outlets that position themselves as the opinion leaders of the liberal intelligentsia? I think the New York Times and their horse’s hindquarters columnists like Friedman and Brooks were mentioned, and how the staffers despise and make fun of them.
Along those lines, the whole Woody-Mia dust-up is absolutely fascinating. Here, with the two op-eds in the NYT, one from Dylan Farrow and the other from the great nebbish himself, we have the Hatfields and McCoys. And lemme tellya, by publishing these op-eds, the snotty gray lady has just dropped her soiled panties. Really, the National Enquirer and News of the World have nothing, and I mean NOTHING on the NYT. Bwa-hah-ha-ha-hah!
Nor do the participants on the Jerry Springer and Maury Povich shows have anything on Allen and Farrow. Not a thing. Anyone see the photo of Ronan Farrow side by side with Frank Sinatra? Holy Jeebus. I half expected Ronan to break out in song “New York, New York”, and it would have been completely fitting. We gotta get poor Woody (sarc) some relief here, a Springer or a Povich to open that DNA test and say “Woody, you are NOT the father”. Especially since he paid the child support all these years.
On the other side we have this poor young woman completely twisted up about childhood abuse, probably viciously used by both Allen and Farrow in one way or another, and I have to say, I’m inclined to believe her. But, here’s Baba Wawa and Rosie choosing sides and getting into it. Why don’t they just mud-wrestle? My money’s on Rosie.
My point, and I do have one, is that these folks and their media organs of choice see themselves as the “very best people”, the taste-makers, the opinion leaders, the folks who, through arts and letters, will transmit to the great unwashed what’s right and just and what to think and how to act. And in the end, behind that grand facade of literacy and noble ideals, they’re nothing more than trailer or ghetto trash in better clothing. And I apologize for insulting trailer and ghetto trash.
That kid does looks more like Sinatra than Frank jr.
You got that right. He should thank his lucky stars.
This is nothing new, though. Look at a photo of Prince Harry next to Major Hewitt.
Sucks what they do to these kids, the sickos.
What did Major Hewitt do to Prince Harry?
Sorry, that was just a general comment, not aimed at Hewitt in particular, but those who consider themselves above the law, in positions of celebrity, power and authority and seem to have no conscience about their actions and don’t care who they harm, as long as their narcissistic needs are gratified.
I just looked at a photo of Hewitt and Prince Harry- the resemblances are stunning, and given that both Princess Diana and Hewitt admitted they had an affair I cannot see how it is possible that he is not Harry’s father. They look almost identical (nose, chin, smile, hair), and Harry looks NOTHING like Prince Charles.
I must say, it’s been awfully sporting of Charles to raise Harry as his own, although I suppose he figures it’s the price he paid for the whole Camilla thing and other stuff. Everyone seems to have adjusted to it, and I saw an interview with both Prince William and Prince Harry together and it seems that the bond they have is very strong, I guess having the same mother is enough for them.
I guess, at that level, it’s tickety-boo, stiff upper lip and all that.
I couldn’t help thinking about that, though, when I saw some PBS nature special. I hope I’m remembering the avian species correctly, I think it was puffins or something like that. They pair off, male and female, and the male goes off for a while to search for food or whatever, and the female hangs around with the flock in the nesting grounds and sometimes a female will get it on with a male neighbor while hubby’s away.
Hubby comes back and builds a nest with wifey, who presents him with an egg a few months later. Hubby is suspicious about the origin of that egg, but pretends nothing’s wrong and bills and coos with wifey. Now it’s her turn to fly off for food, and while she’s gone, hubby rolls the egg out of the nest and kicks it off the ledge. His instinct tells him it’s not his, and he’ll be danged if he’s going to sacrifice to raise some other puffin’s progeny. Life’s tough and there’s a lot of battling inclement weather and predators to bring home the bacon.
Wifey comes back, hubby just stands there next to the empty nest and that’s that. He takes her back, but she knows she’s been caught. No fuss, no muss. No op-eds in the NYT, no scandal sheets publishing photos or recording phone calls, no divorce lawyers, no he said, she said. Life goes on.
jose canusi:: Along those lines, the whole Woody-Mia dust-up is absolutely fascinating. Here, with the two op-eds in the NYT, one from Dylan Farrow and the other from the great nebbish himself, we have the Hatfields and McCoys.
The kicker here is that Woody Allen married his own stepdaughter.
1992: Allen 56, Previn 21. Allen has nude pics of her.
1979: Mia Farrow adopts Previn, aged 8.
1980-1992: Allen has relationship with Mia Farrow.
Allen claims he had no father-like duties or attitudes towards Previn. This was his long-time girlfriend’s stepdaughter, whom he first met when she was 9.
References:
1) Wikipedia
2) Yahoo
Heh, I remember when that happened, always had the wiff of a shotgun wedding. And that’s what made the whole Dylan Farrow accusation believable to me. Sick, but that’s what some of these folks are like and people are always shocked, I tell you, SHOCKED when the dirty laundry spills out of the hamper.
I’m tellin’ ya, it’s real Jerry Springer type stuff here. And they have the nerve to look down on the South and make cracks about rednecks, Deliverance and inbreeding.
My advice to ANY of the progeny of Farrow or Allen: change your name and get as far away from these screaming freaks as you can.
And rent, don’t buy.
NAACP requires marchers protesting North Carolina voter ID law TO SHOW PHOTO ID
Katie McHugh
Daily Caller
February 9, 2014
North Carolinians marching to protest voter-ID laws must present a valid photo ID to participate in an NAACP-hosted protest against voter-ID laws in Raleigh on Saturday.
The central claim among the protesters is that the voter-ID laws disenfranchise certain segments of the voting population, particularly minority voters and poor voters.
According to official NAACP flyers passed out at the rally, protesters must carry the precise kind of ID that they would be expected to present at the voting booth.
The march, dubbed the “Moral March” by its leader Rev. William Barber II, who called for a “wave of civil disobedience” while railing against education cuts and the voter ID law, is the latest of a series of protests held against the state’s GOP-controlled legislature. Over 900 “peaceful” and “non-violent” protesters have been arrested since the beginning of the state’s legislative session last January. Police have taken a handful of them into custody each week after they obstructed legislators within the capitol building.
Full article here
DHS Secretary on Illegal Aliens: ‘They’re Here, and They’re Not Going Away’
Penny Starr
CNS News
February 9, 2014
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, the nation’s top immigration law enforcer, said on Friday that the estimated 11.5 million illegal aliens in the United States are “not going away.”
“They’re here, and they’re not going away,” Johnson said at the Woodrow Wilson Center in remarks billed by the Obama administration as his “first major speech.”
Johnson’s comment came after he gave his prepared address and was in response to Jane Harman, president and CEO of the Woodrow Wilson Center, asking him about the fate of immigration reform in this session of Congress.
“In today’s press there is a new comment from House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) that it may not happen this year I think,” Harman said, “which is going to be a great disappointment to many communities across our country who were hoping it will and to our efforts to rebuild our economy after the most serious recession since the Great Depression.
Full article here
“They’re here, and they’re not going away,” Johnson said
How did this idiot ever get a law degree? Of course they’re not going away, no one goes away once they’ve sat their arse in a tub of butter. Not of their own volition.
Jeh.
If the US were to announce plans for a massive sweep to arrest, fine, and deport all illegals, but with the caveat that they had a month to leave on their own accord, we would see a mass exodus, and companies feeding at the trough of illegal labor would be exposed like those swimming naked when the tide went out. They would be forced to pay higher wages to attract applicants, and things would start taking care of themselves as far as unemployment is concerned. This is the LAST thing that corporations and politicians want. So, I’m actually in favor of a MASSIVE hike in minimum wage. This would crucify those corporations and their illegal alien labor model.
No argument from me.
Wouldn’t that only crucify the ones that pay their illegals a legal wage?
“If the US were to announce plans for a massive sweep to arrest, fine, and deport all illegals,”
They already constitute over 25% of the federal prison population.
Illegal Immigration Facts
Let’s review a few basics first. Immigrants have enhanced America. Immigrants and illegal aliens are neither inherently good nor inherently bad. Legal immigrants come to America with the explicit approval of Congress and thus all Americans. Illegal aliens come here with an implicit ‘blind eye’ approval. Thus, illegal immigration problems are due essentially to inaction of Congress, law enforcement, and ultimately American citizens. To fix our dysfunctional immigration system, Americans need to educate and change legal, political, educational, environmental, labor and religious institutions.
As part of our education it will help to know some facts:
In 1986, Congress granted amnesty to 3.1 million illegal aliens.
In 1990, Congress increased legal immigration by 40%, and granted amnesty to the illegal relatives of aliens who benefited from the previous amnesty.
10-20 million illegal aliens presently roam the U.S. The number of illegal aliens doubled in the 1990’s.
Each year more than 1.3 million legal and illegal aliens settle permanently in the U.S.
For every 100 illegal aliens who find jobs in the U.S., 65 American workers are displaced.
Each year, more than 72,000 aliens are arrested for drug offenses in the U.S.
Illegal aliens constitute over 25% of the federal prison population. Think about that for a moment. This means that a group which comprises less than 5% of the population is committing 25% percent of the crime.
In some areas of the country, up to 12 % of felonies, 25% of burglaries and 34% of thefts are committed by illegal aliens.
In Los Angeles alone, 95% of all outstanding warrants for homicide (which total approximately 1,200-1,500) target illegal aliens. Up to 2/3 of all fugitive felony warrants (approximately 17,000) are for illegal aliens.
In Lake County, Illinois 1/2 of the murderers and 21.5% of all criminals now in jail are illegal aliens, costing the county an annualized rate of $4,056, 945.
Approximately 400,000 illegal aliens who have committed crimes and have been given a deportation order are at large in the U.S. and their whereabouts unknown.
In fiscal year 1999, expenses for incarcerating illegal aliens in state & local jails in Pennsylvania alone cost taxpayers $13.3 million. It has been established that the nationwide costs to states and localities for housing illegal criminal aliens is about $2 billion per year.
A 2011 report on the fiscal burden of illegal immigration on United States taxpayers found the following:
Illegal immigration costs U.S. taxpayers about $113 billion a year at the federal, state and local level. The bulk of the costs — some $84 billion — are absorbed by state and local governments.
The annual outlay that illegal aliens cost U.S. taxpayers is an average amount per native-headed household of $1,117. The fiscal impact per household varies considerably because the greatest share of the burden falls on state and local taxpayers whose burden depends on the size of the illegal alien population in that locality
Education for the children of illegal aliens constitutes the single largest cost to taxpayers, at an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. Nearly all of those costs are absorbed by state and local governments.
At the federal level, about one-third of outlays are matched by tax collections from illegal aliens. At the state and local level, an average of less than 5 percent of the public costs associated with illegal immigration is recouped through taxes collected from illegal aliens.
Most illegal aliens do not pay income taxes. Among those who do, much of the revenues collected are refunded to the illegal aliens when they file tax returns. Many are also claiming tax credits resulting in payments from the U.S. Treasury.
Additionally, the estimated cost of illegal immigration to Indiana state and local governements is $608 million per year.
http://citizensforlaws.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=76&Itemid=101 -
Mayor: Nationwide Gun Confiscation Is Goal of Mayors Against Illegal Guns
Poughkeepsie, N.Y. mayor says he left the group over confiscation plans
Kit Daniels
Infowars.com
February 7, 2014
A current New York mayor has publicly announced his decision to leave Mayors Against Illegal Guns because the gun control group demands an all-out “confiscation of guns from law-abiding citizens.”
Former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg co-founded Mayors Against Illegal Guns in 2006 to promote gun control.
In an announcement published by his city’s newspaper, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. Mayor John C. Tkazyik said he quit the group after realizing it was simply a vehicle for Michael Bloomberg to “promote his personal gun-control agenda.”
“It did not take long to realize that MAIG’s agenda was much more than ridding felons of illegal guns,” he stated. “Under the guise of helping mayors facing a crime and drug epidemic, MAIG intended to promote confiscation of guns from law-abiding citizens.”
“I don’t believe, never have believed and never will believe that public safety is enhanced by encroaching on our right to bear arms and I will not be a part of any organization that does.”
Tkazyik also pointed out that Chicago’s extremely high crime rates are undeterred by the city’s highly restrictive gun laws.
“Depriving law-abiding citizens of their right to own firearms only makes them more vulnerable,” he added.
Tkazyik’s announcement is a stark contrast to the rhetoric of other politicians who want to grossly violate human rights.
At a gun control event earlier this year, Austin, Texas City Council Member Mike Martinez admitted that gun control is simply a step-by-step process to completely eliminate the Second Amendment.
While pointing at a sign held by a protestor which read “Stop Gun Ban,” Martinez said that “someone needs to inform him that there is no gun ban currently, but because of the work we’re doing today, we will make [his] sign legitimate shortly.”
“So you hang on to that [sign],” he said to a cheering crowd of gun control advocates.
And in a flashback to 1995, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca.) told 60 Minutes that she wanted to outright ban all firearms owned by Americans.
“If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them … ‘Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in,’ I would have done it,” she said.
This is the true intent of gun control, even though many of its advocates whitewash the truth with a variety of propaganda techniques or by just simply being ignorant.
For example, the organizers for the event at which Martinez spoke told reporters that they didn’t want to ban guns even though that is exactly what Martinez demanded in his speech.
Gun control advocates constantly parrot deceptive phrases such as “common sense solutions” and “we don’t want to ban guns” when selling their agenda which will only lead to the complete disarmament of the population by authoritarians.
Fortunately, on the other hand, Mayor Tkazyik is joining an ever-increasing list of public officials who have denounced gun control.
Last month, Detroit’s Police Chief James Craig told reporters that legal gun owners deter crime.
“Coming from California, where it takes an act of Congress to get a concealed weapon permit, I got to Maine, where they give out lots of Carrying Concealed Weapon [permits], and I had a stack of CCW permits I was denying; that was my orientation,” he said. “I changed my orientation real quick; Maine is one of the safest places in America.”
“Clearly, suspects knew that good Americans were armed.”
And last year, Erie Co., N.Y. Sheriff Timothy B. Howard publicly announced that his department would not enforce New York’s latest gun control law, the SAFE Act.
“It’s an unenforceable law and I believe it will ultimately be declared unconstitutional,” he said to reporters. “Do you want law enforcement people that will say ‘I will do this because I’m told to do this, even if I know it’s wrong?’”
It is refreshing to see elected officials serving their constituents while also respecting the Bill of Rights.
This article was posted: Sunday, February 9, 2014 at 11:40 am
Molon Labe.
Smokin some baby Backs on the Weber at casa phony today.
been watchn some olympic coverage. amazing the air those guys/and gals get on those snowboards.
“Olympic coverage”.
What a joke. NBnoSee has FAILED. I mean, the men’s downhill concluded over 12 hours ago, and it’s still not on (but I already know the results- BODE FAIL). I’m forced to watch ski jumping from a day ago; that was this morning, actually. Now there’s nothing on! They’ve got soccer on the cable NBC sports, and something else on the local level. Are you f*cking kidding me? You have to have a specific provider and package in order to access NBC.com, and they black out access to BBC, etc. for Americans. I can’t watch ANY live coverage! What a F*CK JOB! Abysmal.
could be worse and have no coverage?
So I’m supposed to compare my country, the supposed leader in the free world, to a 3rd world country? Is this Realtwhore think?
b thankful you u have a tv debt donkey.
Now that’s rich. A sheeple home-debtor calling somebody with no debt a “debt donkey”.
your up to your eyeballs n debt aren’t you donkey?
So we can add reading incomprehension to your long list of densities..
Ask the $hitHousePoet about his intensive purposes.
Long read. Makes as much sense as most stuff out there, and it has graphs.
http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue58/Koo58.pdf
Wrong-Way Crash Kills Five on Florida Highway
By Elisha Fieldstadt
February 9 2014, 8:20 AM
Five men were killed when a driver going the wrong way on a highway in central Florida crashed into a car with four passengers early Sunday, officials.
The Ford Expedition — travelling south on a northbound lane of Interstate 275 in North Tampa — burst into flames after striking a Hyundai head-on, said the Florida Highway Patrol’s Sgt. Steve Gaskins.
All four people in the Hyundai and the wrong-way driver all died at the scene, according to a Florida Highway Patrol statement.
The driver in the SUV was a male in his early 20s, but his identity has not been confirmed yet because his body was severely burned, Gaskins said.
The other four victims were also males in their 20s, but their identities will not be released until next of kin are notified.
No other vehicles were affected by the collision, but northbound lanes of I-275 were closed for five hours while the accident investigation was underway.
Investigators do not yet know whether drugs or alcohol were involved, pending toxicology testing, Gaskins said.
Meanwhile on the other side of the country, six people were killed and a 21-year-old woman is facing criminal charges after she crashed her car while driving the wrong way on a Los Angeles County freeway while allegedly under the influence early Sunday, Californian authorities said.
Hey RW, thx for the link to the JPM quarterly Guide to the Markets; there were definitely a few interesting tidbits in there…
The best investment you can make in 2014?
http://www.kitco.com/ind/Lombardi/2014-02-07-The-Best-Investment-You-Can-Make-in-2014.html
hard assets buddy have u seen the cost of beef lately?
Not really. I hardly ever eat beef or pork. Perhaps once every ten days. When I do I pay whatever is charged without care.
Same here. Mostly turkey and chicken. I don’t think beef and pork are healthy at all. My future might involve raising my own chickens and never eating beef or pork again. I don’t really need or miss it. Not a fan of Smithfield Farms, either.
Prime rib roasts are $5.99/lb in the northeast. That’s cheap.
I know Salmon is expensive, but in these parts, I buy the wild caught Sockeye Salmon, loaded with Omega 3s. Baked Salmon several times a week. Good to add olive oil on the filet after taking it out of the oven for an added health kick. With chopped green onion and cooked aparagus on the side, maybe some fresh avocado on the salmon you got a very healthy dinner.
Who says singles eat junk food?
(Exception: In Colorado I went off my diet. My boss took us to dinner and we had decadent food. barbecue at Oscar Blues one night and then wings at Buffalo Wild Wings in Longmont the next night. And a few beers. But got back to my sane mostly organic diet Saturday. My secret to being healthy is to take the rare decadent days but eat healthy when I’m not on business travel)
Is it 1999 again in bubble history?
Easy money will bubbles inflate.
ft dot com
Last updated: February 9, 2014 1:35 pm
US Biotech IPO fever stokes bubble fears
By Arash Massoudi in New York and Andrew Ward in London
The fastest start to a year for US biotech initial public offerings is stoking fears of a bubble amid concerns investors are taking risks on companies at the earliest stage of medical research.
Another eight biotech companies raised a combined $502m in US listings last week, setting a weekly record for the sector and continuing a boom that has seen the Nasdaq biotech index rise more than two-thirds in the past year.
However, fears of overheating are growing as companies come to market at an early stage of drug development when failures are high – and in one case without the usual restrictions that bar existing owners from making a quick profit on IPOs.
The recent listing of Dicerna Pharmaceuticals, which raised $90m in late January and saw its shares surge 207 per cent on its first day of trading, is becoming a focal point for concerns.
The Massachusetts-based company has yet to enter clinical trials for the liver disease and cancers it seeks to treat, which typically means it has a less than 5 per cent chance of one day getting a drug to market, according to industry analysts.
…
Has the Fed’s stimulus package gone limp?
A limp wand is by nature impotent.
ft dot com
February 9, 2014 6:06 pm
The Fed’s waning magic in the age of Yellen
By Edward Luce
With a forecast year of take-off in danger of faltering, the central bank has run out of ammunition
Every chairman of the US Federal Reserve seems to get hit by a crisis in their first year. For Paul Volcker in 1979 it was raging inflation. For Alan Greenspan it was the 1987 “Black Monday” meltdown. And for Ben Bernanke in 2006 it was the bursting of the US housing bubble. Whatever might blindside Janet Yellen, she starts off with a problem that affected none of her predecessors: the Fed has run out of ammunition. Moreover the one remaining weapon the Fed thinks it has – the hocus-pocus of “forward guidance” – is a gun that fires blanks.
Given how much emphasis Ms Yellen puts on forward guidance, her first conundrum is plain. A widely forecast year of US take-off is once again in danger of faltering before it happens. US job creation since November has averaged 116,000 a month – well below escape velocity. Manufacturing growth has stalled. And export growth is slowing sharply. Some of this might be seasonal. Last month’s chilling “polar vortex” was hardly a good time for America’s jobseekers to pound the streets. But it is inconsistent with the strong rebound that was expected in 2014.
Should the poor numbers persist, Ms Yellen’s first option – to press pause on the Fed’s two-month-old tapering – would be hard to take even if she wanted to. At his final meeting in January, Mr Bernanke wound down quantitative easing by another $10bn to $65bn a month. Ms Yellen, who delivers her first congressional testimony on Tuesday, was right behind him. Last year the Fed confused everybody – and shook the markets – by hinting that tapering was imminent then changing its mind before finally going ahead in December. Another shift would look careless. Besides, Ms Yellen has made it plain that the costs of QE3, in terms of equity market froth, were starting to exceed its benefits. Expect her to continue with the taper.
Second, the Fed’s chief weapon, lowering interest rates, was used up a long time ago. The US is now in its sixth year of zero interest rates. Some, including Lawrence Summers, who was Barack Obama’s controversial first choice to replace Mr Bernanke, believe America’s equilibrium interest rate is minus several percentage points. His argument set off a fierce debate about “secular stagnation”. But even if he is right, and even if Ms Yellen shared his diagnosis, it is extremely doubtful she could persuade the Fed’s board to engineer higher inflation to bring about deeply negative real rates of interest. Moreover, the resulting uproar in Congress would pose a threat to the central bank’s independence: it would be a gift to the “End the Fed” gold bugs. This option, too, can therefore be ruled out.
Which leaves forward guidance. Its great advantage is that words are cheap – all the Fed has to do is fiddle with its language and the market’s expectations will supposedly comply. Its great disadvantage is that the markets often see through the Fed’s kabuki. Some of the best economists in the business have built cast-iron models to justify forward guidance. But monetary economists can often be too clever by half. As Liaquat Ahamed, the historian of central banking, quipped in an exit interview with Mr Bernanke last month, guidance tends to work in theory but not in practice.
Ms Yellen’s quandary is captured in the increasingly confusing US jobless numbers. Under the Fed’s existing guidance, which was communicated in early 2012, it pledged to keep interest rates at zero until unemployment fell below 6.5 per cent or inflation exceeded 2.5 per cent. Last month US unemployment dropped to 6.6 per cent – a month or two away from dipping below its threshold. Inflation is nowhere to be seen.
No one believes the drop in jobless numbers reflects US overheating. Most of the fall is a result of people abandoning the search for work rather than robust job creation. The same problem faces Mark Carney, the Bank of England governor, who promised to keep interest rates low until UK unemployment fell below 7 per cent. It recently fell to 7.1 per cent. Again, he is unlikely to raise rates when joblessness dips below that level. Neither guidance has credibility with the markets, which makes them useless.
…
Upside to all of this: Markets are likely going to be much more efficient than when the Fed had unlimited discretion supported by a big bazooka to manipulate them to its liking.
Is it safe to say the stock market’s January swoon is over now and it’s clear sailing from now on out through year-end 2014?
U.S. News
Slow Jobs Growth Stirs Worry
Economy’s Anticipated 2014 Breakout Hits a Speed Bump, but Stocks Shrug Off Disappointing Report
By Eric Morath and Neil Shah
Updated Feb. 7, 2014 7:28 p.m. ET
A hiring chill hit the U.S. labor market for the second straight month in January, reflecting employers’ reluctance to take on new workers despite some of the nation’s strongest economic growth in years.
U.S. payrolls rose a seasonally adjusted 113,000 in January after December’s lackluster gain of 75,000 jobs, marking the weakest two-month stretch of job creation in three years, the Labor Department said Friday.
The U.S. economy added 113,000 non-farm payrolls to the economy in January, and the unemployment rate dropped to 6.6%. How will Fed’s tapering be affected by it? WSJ’s Sudeep Reddy and Phil Izzo join the News Hub. Photo: Getty.
Yet the unemployment rate ticked down to 6.6%—the lowest level since late 2008. The decline came because more people found jobs last month as opposed to last year when it fell in part because of unemployed Americans abandoning their job hunts and dropping out of the labor force.
The soft hiring numbers join a recent cavalcade of mixed economic data on exports, housing and manufacturing. These trends, coupled with worries about emerging markets, have unsettled investors and stoked doubts about a stronger global recovery.
The confounding performance, particularly the weaker payroll gains, comes after months of mounting enthusiasm among many businesses, consumers and investors about stronger expansion. It indicates growth in gross domestic product could be settling back near the 2% pace recorded for most of the recovery rather than the better-than-3% annualized gain in the second half of 2013.
“The economy got a little ahead of itself late last year,” said Doug Handler, chief U.S. economist at IHS Global Insight. He said economic fundamentals generally remain strong, “but there are headwinds in the first quarter.”
…
Signs of Weakness
Check out the Pending Home Sales number: Quite a plunge!
At a quick glance, I take it that investors in U.S. residential real estate are about to lose alot of money — ALOT. (Especially since Lil’ Sis is buying again now.)
Hulbert: How to beat a falling market
Feb. 7, 2014, 3:01 p.m. EST
10 quality stocks to beat a declining market
Opinion: Looking for companies that hold their own in a correction
My suggestion: Try not to catch yourself a falling knife.