Bits Bucket for February 11, 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
-
December 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 31
Photo Submission: hbbphotos@gmail.com
View the HBB Photo Gallery *updated 4/13/2008
My renting brother is trying to buy. I sent him your blog address. I’ve been told that the rental rates in Iowa City are second only to NYC. Any facts on that?
Quik check of apt dot com and zillow…
Rental rates are certainly not “second to NYC” but certainly not low low.
Most importantly, houses in Iowa City are priced in a very wide range. Older stuff is priced around $125K, newer shinies are double that. So your brother has a lot of choice, depending on his ego. How is the crime or seedy nabes in Iowa City? If he can stomach a smaller, older, or less appealing house he can do very well. If he insists on new and shiny he’ll get crushed. Condos of any stripe are bad.
Unfortunately, HBB will not help him now, as it would have in, say, 2006. To someone who hasn’t been following, HBB looks like a grieving session for Treasury bonds, foreign bubbles several oceans away, or Chinese bidding wars on the coasts which may drive up the national averages but means zilch for flyover. And the HBB anti-buying crowd is so clownish as to backfire and push someone into buying instead of away from it. (in fact, I expect a debt-donky picture at any moment.)
Sorry, that’s my objective opinion.
PITI-wise, he’s right on the cusp of rent/buy. He needs to run his numbers, and think long and hard about his future and career and family situation. Send him this link:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/business/buy-rent-calculator.html?_r=1&
Make sure he enters in his numbers, honestly. Make sure he uses all the “advanced” buttons and clicks on Rent, Buy, Other. Make sure he uses all the sliders to test out his scenarios. Good luck.
“that’s my objective opinion.”
LOLZ. You lost all objectivity when you made the costly mistake of paying a 250% premium for a depreciating shack.
“Unfortunately, HBB will not help him now, as it would have in, say, 2006. To someone who hasn’t been following, HBB looks like a grieving session for Treasury bonds, foreign bubbles several oceans away, or Chinese bidding wars on the coasts which may drive up the national averages but means zilch for flyover. And the HBB anti-buying crowd is so clownish as to backfire and push someone into buying instead of away from it. (in fact, I expect a debt-donky picture at any moment.)
Sorry, that’s my objective opinion.”
You just gave the guy some decent advice, so as an individual member of HBB, you did help him.
Although I understand your annoyance, it’s not necessary to slag the rest of the blog because of the actions of a couple of posters. A number of people here besides yourself do provide valuable information, although sometimes you have to cut through the noise to get to it.
Tell your brother to wait. Oxide pretends to be rational but is so far stuck in her own consistency bias to justify her own purchase to those here on this blog that she is blinded to the fact that prices have already started to drop. There are many reasons prices will drop further soon, but you need to wade through the shills for the nuggets of gold.
The shills on this blog like Rental Watch (an admitted Real Estate Industrial Complex shill who works for a property development company) Jingle Male and others would like to undermine anyone who says anything other than prices will rise forever. (Mules and Debt Donkeys are a similar but slightly different flavor).
Also many liberals or conservatives here who also actually believe the market will drop can’t help but to debate their pet theories on politics, solar power, or bicycles endlessly.
Finally there are also a lot of skinflints and tightwads who seem to think that splitting two-ply toilet paper into two roles equals a win in life.
But prices have been dropping in many if not most places and soon it will again be in all places. Paying 10%+ less for waiting 6 months to a year makes sense. How do I know? Because the shills are now saying prices will be “steady” or “stable” or will only “increase 5%”. Statements like these are Stealtors admitting that the run up is over and the drop is beginning.
Finally there are also a lot of skinflints and tightwads who seem to think that splitting two-ply toilet paper into two roles equals a win in life.
now that is some funny chit!
“splitting two-ply toilet paper into two roles”
And today’s intensive purposes award goes to (drumroll, please):
Ronnie’s Left Mango!
It’s metaphoric in a Freudian way.
Awesome, I won a Major Award! Lack of enough coffee is my only excuse.
Thank you all for proving my point.
Jose, I don’t disagree that there is good advice on this blog, but I noted that Clark’s brother would be a newbie, and may not be able to identify the noise among the braying. The endless sockpuppet name changes also don’t help, palmetto. Daily reports on the bond market and articles from China might be nice, but it’s NOT the kind of boots-on-the-ground info that applies to flyover.
she is blinded to the fact that prices have already started to drop.
No, I am not. I’m just trying to put myself into the position of a family man (or future family man). Any graph of house prices vs. rents, or even a standard Case Shiller graph, will show that from 2008-2012, prices dropped from the big bubble high to historical norm (circa 1982) adjusted for inflation. Prices bounced a bit and then rose into a second “bubblet” due to investor cash and foreign cash. Prices probably WILL fall to the inflation line again, but I don’t anticipate that they will fall further. Not in areas with stable jobs.
I debated on whether to advise Clark’s brother to wait until next winter, or even spring 2015, to wait for prices to fall again back to the inflation line. I decided against it, and here’s why: Clark’s brother wants to LIVE IN a house. And presumably in a neighborhood he likes, with schools he likes, and a commute he likes.
At least from a cursory look, good houses in Iowa City run roughly $150K to $200K (or less, depending on neighborhoods etc). Even if house prices do drop that 10%, that’s at most a $20K price difference. HBB may crow over that, but to a regular family who don’t yak on about this every day, is it worth buying an unsatisfactory house in an unsatisfactory location just so that he can SAY he got a rock bottom price? Is it worth spending the rent for another year hoping to get lucky and time the market? Only Clark’s brother can answer that.
The New York Times rent vs. buy calculator will help him far more than any of us.
Good job Donkey. That perfectly cements your delusion.
10 percent less for 6 months wait is certainly worth it unless u are a debt donkey. That extra 20k financed for 30 years is a big chunk. It can also mean the difference between an unsatisfactory location and one much better. Besides the question was not serious, it was passing on some Stealtor advice comparing NYC to BFE. C’mon use that scientist brain.
I have started to change my name when I empty my browser cache every now and then. It challenges me to think up some funny stuff for Lola, who can then pretend to ignore me.
“who can then pretend to ignore me.”
All the cowards seem to advise everyone to ignore me yet they never do it themselves.
Strange world.
“would like to undermine anyone who says anything other than prices will rise forever.”
Who the hell here thinks that? You misrepresent this place big time with your assertion. The only disagreement seems to be how much it’s going to drop and when, and in what markets. Jokester posters such as Amy Hoax do not count. You mention RW, but he has said many times that prices will come down, just not as much as some here insist.
RW incredulous statements(and lies) are well documented.
He’s a liar.
“RW incredulous statements(and lies) are well documented.”
I guess it’s a fine line between documented and alleged.
Then sign right up for his BS. It’s a free country.
debt-donky picture
Someone throw her a rope please.
You know, instead of using your google-fu and linky-loos to make fun yet again, maybe you could look up some data on Iowa City, or speculate on what dumping your bond fund will mean to the price of ground beef in Iowa City, or otherwise use your high-falutin’ Econ edumacation to actually HELP OUT Clark’s brother in Iowa City. Or do we not do that anymore?
Considering you’re so concerned with this ruse, why not fully execute it and offer him your glowing wisdom and guidance on how to lose a lifetime of earnings.
Proceed.
That’s still the best one yet, and maybe can’t be beat, but I already have a new Sunday picture picked out from Oxide’s album. She is a very adventerous ungulate, indeed.
Unfortunately, HBB will not help him now, as it would have in, say, 2006. To someone who hasn’t been following, HBB looks like a grieving session for Treasury bonds, foreign bubbles several oceans away, or Chinese bidding wars on the coasts which may drive up the national averages but means zilch for flyover. And the HBB anti-buying crowd is so clownish as to backfire and push someone into buying instead of away from it. (in fact, I expect a debt-donky picture at any moment.)”
Hahahaha that’s funny
You already have a rope. It’s around you neck.
“several oceans away…”
what planet are you talking about?
I counted the Pacific as two Atlantics.
I thought maybe you were counting Kansas.
Oxide:
HBB won’t help you now, since you already bought a house during the partial crash that occured in your part of the country. A different person might be helped by this blog, AND they might gain some insight into macroeconomics. Don’t forget, some of us DO own real estate, but we might not recommend buying right now.
HBB tried to help her, really we did. She was oceans away though.
That’s some well-worded and dispassionate advice. Well done! I’m cutting and pasting it and sending it to other youngsters in similar situations, with your permission.
The thread is long, so I think you’re replying to me and not someone else? Of course, reprint it. That NYT calculator is especially valuable.
But I don’t know how well it would apply to any larger city. Iowa city is small enough that you can buy a cheap house and commute anywhere else, so you only need to avoid a bad neighborhood. In larger cities, anything within commuting distance is expensive, solely because it IS within commuting distance.
The NYT “calculator” is hopelessly deficient and you know it so why continue to keep that lie going?
Why buy now when he could buy later for 62.33% less.
But seriously, you should tell your bro about the RAL app. It’s available on iTunes and Google Play. Also available in the sidebars of Gmail, Hotmail, and AOL mail (next to Manilla).
Good Morning Liberace……
Thank you for disclosing yesterday that you have a stake in the direction of housing prices.
Why would I have a stake? We pay higher property taxes if prices go up. I don’t want that. SE Baltimore City got reassessed this year (it’s every 3 yrs); I am appealing the property taxes on virtually every house and showing that I think the assessors cherry-picked their comps. In MD, rental property is not eligible for tax credits, it has to be owner-occupied. We never plan to sell. Depreciation is very nice and the area is OK but not going to rise that much.
I also never plan to sell my personal residence unless I win the lottery
“We pay higher property taxes if prices go up. I don’t want that.”
Joey, I hear ya. Same for us.
Interestingly enough, at a Council On Aging Meeting yesterday, I learned a bill in Ca is being proposed for a little extra exemption room for folks 65+ on their property taxes. Increasing from $7K to $20K which is an additional $180 off our annual bill.
I like that idea. With any luck (kicking and screaming all the way) I’ll get there.
inch — I thought CA has very strong property tax credit programs where you basically lock in your property taxes for life shortly after you buy the property? And I thought CA doesn’t even bother to limit it to owner-occupied housing?
Inch:
I’m not sure the Boomer crowd should be asking for yet another tax break. You guys were THEE beneficiaris of Prop 13 to begin with, and now you want like Prop 13.2, but only for your own age? That’s absurd. Just use your Social Security money to pay the miniscule property taxes on your paid-off house already.
This is a joke, right? Okay you got me.
“I’ve been told that the rental rates in Iowa City are second only to NYC.”
I have to assume that is a Realtor® lie.
Why do you have to “assume” it? Why don’t you LOOK IT UP??
My renting brother
Read it quickly and thought you said rented brother. I was truly excited. It sure would make holidays better if at the Thanksgiving meal you can eat with the relatives you rented instead of the ones you own due to birth.
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®
“Hold on tight to your cash folks. You’re going to need it in ways you can’t imagine.”
You better believe it.
“Why pay more than new construction cost ($60 per square foot) for a depreciating 20+ year old resale house?”
Exactly.
“Why buy a house at current massively inflated asking prices of resale housing? Rent for half the monthly cost, then buy later, after prices crater, for 65% less.”
You’re correct.
“I have so much money left over after “throwing money away on rent” every month that I don’t know where to throw it”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGRoEfRJSGs
buy stocks and homes so the wealth effect trickles down to people actually working at a service job.
Can you confirm my suspicion that when you say stuff like this it’s parody or sarcasm?
this is FED policy isnt it?
Manipulate asset prices so the wealth trickles down to the guy who has to work for a living.
Explain to me how that is wrong.
Samuel L Jackson delivers one heckuva smackdown to a SWL (snivelling white liberal) entertainment reporter who confuses him with Laurence Fishburne.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/10/showbiz/samuel-l-jackson-ktla/
Awesome! The SWL also recorded a snivelling on air apology to anyone who was “offended”.
SWL: Can we talk about Robocop?
Jackson: Hell, Nooo!
Just in case anyone thought there would be a credible GOP candidate with business and foreign policy credentials to run in 2016… looks like Huntsman is out. He’ll be taking over as chairman of the Atlantic Council in Jan. 2016. Just announced. (See link below.)
He’s also been filming TV commercials for marriage equality that will air later this year.
The best thing about Huntsman’s campaign in 2012 was that his dad (Jon Huntsman Sr.) was revealed as the source of the leak about Romney’s off shore accounts, IRA stuffing, and ability to pay almost zero US income taxes for the entire decade of the 90s. Huntsman Sr. knew this because he was one of the Mormon elders who had to audit the Romney financials to make sure he was giving 10% of income as a tithe. (Apparently this is a Mormon thing.)
——————
http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/about/experts/list/jon-huntsman
Jon M. Huntsman, Jr. is chairman of the Atlantic Council Board of Directors.
He began his career in public service as a staff assistant to President Ronald Reagan. He has served each of the four US presidents since then in critical roles around the world, including as ambassador to Singapore, deputy assistant secretary of commerce for Asia, US trade ambassador, and most recently, US ambassador to China. Twice elected governor of Utah, Huntsman brought about strong economic reforms, tripled the state’s rainy day fund, and helped bring unemployment rates to historic lows. During his tenure, Utah was named the best managed state in America. Recognized by others for his service, Governor Huntsman was elected as chairman of the Western Governors Association, serving nineteen states throughout the region.
Governor Huntsman ran for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. He currently serves on the boards of Ford Motor Company, Caterpillar Corporation, Chevron Corporation, Huntsman Corporation, the US Naval Academy Foundation, and the University of Pennsylvania. In addition, he serves as a distinguished fellow at the Brookings Institute, a trustee of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a trustee of the Reagan Presidential Foundation, and chairman of the Huntsman Cancer Foundation. He has served as a visiting fellow at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government as well as a distinguished lecturer at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy.
Huntsman is the father of seven children, including two adopted daughters from China and India. His two sons are midshipmen at the US Naval Academy, where his oldest son was selected as a Naval aviator. Huntsman is a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania and has seven honorary doctoral degrees
So he shows his true colors - he’s another globalist.
I dunno man. He’s a lot less shady than Mittens. It would be an improvement over McCain too. I don’t have much faith the GOP to nominate someone like Gary J and now Ron P is probably too old.
Huntsman also has 2 sons who went to Annapolis and would be serving. I would not expect him to be so rah-rah about starting expensive wars abroad while simultaneously underfunding veterans benefits.
As a side bonus, his daughters are also pretty attractive, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abby_Huntsman
Your posts are are a waste of space Liberace.
High praise coming from the brilliant mind behind such original content as “Why buy now when you can buy for ____ later?” and “We build EVERYWHERE for $50/sq ft, total”.
Here’s the difference Liberace…. It’s truthful. We do build anywhere and everywhere profitably for $50-60/sq.
You don’t seem to like that fact. Why is that?
Can you build me a mcmansion on the moon for $50 per sq ft?
Are you cold MoonMan?
Pretty toasty in a temperature controlled environment. Just wondering if you could custom-build the same there.
But I’m not wondering why you’re hiding.
I was being facetious, poking a little fun at people who thinks that international organization ultimately has as one of its goals the end of the nation-state.
“people who thinks” I still need to learn how to type fast and accurately at the same time.
I have given up on that MightyMike.
He is. I have friends that know him personally. He is a good person on an individual basis but his agenda does not benefit the average American.
He will get absolutely no traction with actual GOP voters and activists. Huntsman is the kind of dream Republican candidate the New Republic would support.
Housing News from the Reptile Wing of the GOP…
Sean Hannity is just so in-touch with his fan base. He just listed his $3.6 MM house on Long Island so he can move and be closer to his true fans like Cletus and Kayla. He’s thinking of moving to TX.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/09/sean-hannity-moving-new-york_n_4753887.html
It will be interesting to see if this is just a publicity stunt. He won’t be able to do a TV show on a major network if he’s really living in TX.
How to Hollow out your city 101…
And we wonder how Detroit (which used to be a vibrant and growing city) became a ruin.
And yes - he can do his show in TX. Easily. And save more than 10% just in avoiding NYC income tax, NYS income tax and the “plused up” sales tax of NYC.
He’s not going to get the same guests coming through in TX, man. And FNC has very high production values. No editing and producing team worth its salt is going to leave a media mecca to work in Dallas or whatever. There’s a reason News Corp is based in NYC despite leaning to the right. It’s where all their commentators are, where the producers are, where the desirable guests are, and where the WSJ is (the somewhat “real” news arm of NewsCorp).
Your reptile dreams are entertaining though.
There’s a reason News Corp is based in NYC despite leaning to the right. It’s where all their commentators are, where the producers are, where the desirable guests are, and where the WSJ is (the somewhat “real” news arm of NewsCorp).
The world is flat. If you can outsource to India, you can run things out of Texas. Hell do you think the NSA would be running its operations out of Utah just two decades ago?
AQ Dan, I think that Joey is right. Yes, Hannity could interview his disembodies guests on monitors and do the other technicals of his show from Texas.* However, he’s going to miss out on the parties, the events, the smoke filled back rooms, pillow talk from mistresses, conversations in the hallway, rumors heard on The Streets (literally), run-ins with someone at Penn Station or the Guggenheim or Avery Fisher Hall, and the general in-person vibe that one gets from being there in person. His “access” will suffer for it, likely fatally. Surely he knows this.
Not everything in life is about saving tax money.
——————-
*For reference, the director of the Lord of the Rings movies effectively did post production simultaneously in London and Wellington New Zealand, communicating daily over secure internet and hig-def email. Production values didn’t suffer at all. And this was in 2002.
*For reference, the director of the Lord of the Rings movies effectively did post production simultaneously in London and Wellington New Zealand, communicating daily over secure internet and hig-def email. Production values didn’t suffer at all. And this was in 2002.
Your last part in many ways contradicts your post. Hannity does not have to live in NYC to get the insider information, he can fly in guests that do go to the parties. Quiet frankly I do not think he gets invited to many democratic parties and he still will be involved in Republican ones.
Just found a picture of 2Ban welcoming Hannity to the south:
http://gawker.com/banana-wearing-man-busted-with-ak-47-50-round-clip-1520551323
Sorry, a-dan, I don’t buy that. This is not writing code, or looking up statics equations to write a paper. Politics and finance and news are human nature, and human nature is such that out of sight is still very much out of mind. Some breaking news happens on the street, and you think the insiders are going to “fly in” to Texas to talk to Hannity that day or the next and report on parties second hand? No, they’ll turn to the next young gun reporter in the line of sight.
Ad hominem attack so early in the day, wait you are an Eastcoaster so it is a least past noon.
Some breaking news happens on the street, and you think the insiders are going to “fly in” to Texas to talk to Hannity that day or the next and report on parties second hand?
They do not need to fly to Texas to talk to Hannity. They can e-mail him, text, Skype or phone him. His shows offers access to the American public, it does not matter as much as you think where it is produced. At one time NYC laughed at the upstart Hollywood for the making of movies. How could Hollywood work out, all the great actors and writers were in NYC? Lower production costs matter. Being able to fly people in/out quickly and inexpensively is more important than you think. Why is so much of CNN’s production done in Atlanta? Don’t you have to do everything from DC or NYC?
“His show offers”, for the grammar police. BTW, for those that insist of saying data “are” instead of data is, when have you ever used datum in a sentence? Why can’t you use data as a collective noun? I saw a Brit make the argument on another website and I have always agreed with his logic.
Why is so much of CNN’s production done in Atlanta? Don’t you have to do everything from DC or NYC?
Actually, yes, you do. That’s why the major media outlets have “bureau chiefs” stationed in person in DC and NYC. (Sam Feist and Darius Walker, respectively, if you’re so curious.)
Oxide, I said everything I do not say that you would not have a bureau chief stationed there. Hannity does not run a news show he runs a news commentary show. Unfortunately, 90% of what you see on TV is commentary. I personally watch Al Jazeera and the BBC for most of my news since it is hard news. I respectfully disagree with you, running a commentary show away from DC or NYC is not really a problem, it may even be a benefit since what people want to talk about in Texas is probably more relevant to the rest of America to what people want to talk about in the beltway.
be closer to his true fans like Cletus and Kayla
Wouldn’t that be Cletus (the slack jawed yokel) and Brandine? For the Simpsons impaired, they are the stereotypical hicks.
East Coast and West Coast snobbery. Take things like coffee houses, there may have been a time when the best ones were only on the coasts but I have actually found better ones in flyover. Peet’s Coffeehouse certainly was something in the 60’s when it first opened and Maxwell house was only available in flyover country but by the time I actually started visiting it in the early 1990’s it wasn’t that novel and now there are better places in flyover country and they are far cheaper. The need to live on the coasts is now gone and technology will allow people to live in places with more elk than people and still stay on the cutting edge. Thus, paying two million for an ordinary home in silicon valley is not going to seem like such a great choice.
BTW, I often buy New Mexico Pinon Coffee don’t let the name fool you, it is real coffee with a slight Pinon taste instead of say hazelnut. At Costco, you can often buy two individual pounds for less than $12. Try getting great coffee on the coasts for that.
Thus, paying two million for an ordinary home in silicon valley is not going to seem like such a great choice.
Never underestimate the snobbery associated with living in the Bay Area, especially on the the peninsulas.
Never underestimate the snobbery associated with living in the Bay Area, especially on the the peninsulas.
True. However, is it like the snobbery of the rich buying in the Catskills, as times changed it did not work out too well.
Dewd, the Bay Area has more obnoxious snobs per square inch than I have ever seen. And it’s really not a very nice place to live either. San Diego is much, much better than SF or Silicon Valley, yet ppl in San Diego are less snobby.
Dewd, the Bay Area has more obnoxious snobs per square inch than I have ever seen. And it’s really not a very nice place to live either. San Diego is much, much better than SF or Silicon Valley, yet ppl in San Diego are less snobby.
We agree on something. San Diego has a lot of nice people. I think the Bay Area must lead the country in Prozac consumption or at least should lead it. If you want to fit in be a snub, wear black and be depressed.
The entire state is full of fruits, nuts, fornicators and child molesters. Everything is a great idea….. at someone elses expense.
No thanks.
Years ago I used to watch Fox News Sunday. I’d see their commentators expressing their contempt for liberals. I would think to myself, when it comes time for Brit Hume to retire, is going to move to a small town in Alabama so that he can be with his people? It’s highly unlikely. He’ll probably stay right in the DC area, perhaps with a house or million dollar condo in Palm Springs for the winters.
So I actually have some respect for Hannity doing this, assuming that he goes through with it.
Sales of used houses booming for .1%ers. From WSJ:
————————-
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304428004579355200190620442
“A sales boom is shifting some of the longstanding laws that governed the Hamptons, the pricey resort communities on the eastern end of Long Island.
Sales activity in the Hamptons is now on par with, or even higher than, the mid-2000s peaks. While prices are still below boom-time levels, most of the inventory from the recession has now been absorbed. And in some areas, “there are more buyers than sellers,” says real-estate broker Andrew Saunders of Saunders & Associates.
As a result, buyers and renters are widening their search to areas previously viewed as less desirable. Even the once-titanic divide between north and south of Montauk Highway is less pronounced. Because of their proximity to the ocean, homes south of the highway have long been the most expensive, but houses to the north are now seeing more demand than in the past.”
Didn’t Ben post an article recently about prices in the Hamptons going down, while inventory was going up? Why do we keep getting articles and data that contradict each other?
Krauthammer on Obamacare employer mandate delay: “This is stuff you do in a banana republic”
The Right Scoop
February 11, 2014
Krauthammer says that delaying the employer mandate simply to ease political pain before an election is the kind of stuff they do in banana republics:
But generally speaking you get past the next election by changing your policies, by announcing new initiatives, but not by wantonly changing the law lawlessly. This is stuff you do in a banana republic. It’s as if the law is simply a blackboard on which Obama writes any number he wants, any delay he wants, and any provision.
It’s now reached a point where it is so endemic that nobody even notices or complains. I think if the complaints had started with the first arbitrary changes — and these are are not adjustments or transitions. These are political decisions to minimize the impact leading up to an election. And it’s changing the law in a way that you are not allowed to do.
Right after Krauthammer makes his case for the lawlessness of delaying part of Obamacare yet again, Ron Fournier from the National Journal disagrees on the basis that the administration would argue it’s a tax and thus the Treasury has the ability to amend regulations. Krauthammer argues that they can amend regulations for the purpose of implementing the law, but not for easing political pain. A convinced Fournier appears to respond (off-camera) “fair enough, when you put it that way I agree with you.”
This article was posted: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 at 6:12 am
Ah, another decider! This “law” has GOT to go. I place the blame firmly with thief justice John Roberts, who gave the ACA the force of law under color of a tax. Once again, Republicans are responsible for taking the gun from the dem, loading the bullets and then handing the gun back.
I wouldn’t blame Roberts, who is a good judge in that he uses stare decisis to decide questions of law, rather than try to make new law or insert his personal opinions. Roberts will go down as a very good justice.
I just snapped this helpful reminder of who I’d blame:
http://picpaste.com/1346edd9a2a2bb26090e81d3061570a8.jpg
(Taken from Union Station this morning. It’s a sunny but cold day here.)
Some believe Roberts was coerced into writing an opinion that favored the law, and I’m inclined to believe it. The story goes that he was in the process of writing an opinion against and switched horses at the last minute. Something having to do with his adopted children.
http://www.dailypaul.com/290578/was-nsa-used-to-blackmail-chief-justice-roberts-on-obamacare-ruling
I do blame Roberts. He had the power to scuttle the pig, but didn’t, using the weak argument that it is a tax. We see how well that’s working out.
He could have stopped it. In the end, it was in his hands to do so.
Why do you think that Roberts, rather than his law clerks, writes the opinions? It’s actually pretty rare for a justice to do a heavy amount of writing. They’re more like directors, they can keep sending things back for revision or refinement, but they’re not pulling the all-nighters to write. At my last firm (until last month) I worked with half a dozen former scotus clerks. Souter, Kennedy, Kagan clerks in particular. Not all as egg-headed as you’d think, particular the Kagan clerk: http://jenner.com/people/EricaRoss
Oh yeah, a Scalia clerk too… a very quiet guy with an MIT Engineering background. Anyway, it wasn’t all super libs.
Clarence Thomas’ clerks are usually the weird ones.
Judges aren’t supposed to make decisions based on their own arguments. That might fly in small-claims court, but IMO the decision was illegal in itself, since it involved the illegal practice of the judge acting as a lawyer on behalf of one side of the argument.
obamacare was passed illegally through the reconciliation process in the dead of night on Christmas Eve.
Obamacare passed the House on March 21st, 2010 with 219 democrat votes and ZERO republican votes
Obamacare passed the Senate on December 24, 2009 with 60 democrat (and independents who caucused democrat) votes and ZERO republican votes
Obamacare was signed into law by President obama on March 23, 2010.
So - who OWNS obamacare?
Krauthammer on Obamacare employer mandate delay: “This is stuff you do in a banana republic”
I don’t understand.
Repubs shut down the government in order to delay the mandate for a year. Isn’t shutting down a government “stuff you do in a banana republic”?
And now they say Obama delaying the mandate is “stuff you do in a banana republic”?
So by that logic did not the Repubs do “stuff you do in a banana republic” in order force Obama to do “stuff you do in a banana republic”?
It’s confusing keeping up with the ever changing Repub talking points.
logic to socialists.
Don’t pass your own budget for 5 years. Don’t even propose one.
Reject the republican passed budgets every year. Call it a shutdown.
Modify and change laws according to your whims.
Can’t wait to hear you sequel like a pig when a republican president does it. And I know you will cry and whimper never seeing your own hypocrisy.
More socialist logic: http://picpaste.com/d395532217c214dddf00ce687b7817b4.jpg
Can’t wait to hear you sequel like a pig when a republican president does it.
Why would today’s America elect a Republican President? Americans don’t like Republicans too much on a national level. Why would they? Have the Repubs changed lately? It’s sad. America is going forward and a big part of the Repub party is going backwards.
Let’s look at the math as a wake-up call. Dem’s have won the popular vote in 5 out of the last 6 presidential elections. Five out of six. Over a span of two decades.
Obama won with over 50% twice. Twice. That’s rare. Obama won a second time with over 50% during a bad recession. Who does that? No one in my lifetime. And Obama’s black and he still did it. (Newsflash: Yes much of America is still racist. Crazy huh?)
That’s how much Americans are wary about Repubs on a national level. Did you watch the Repub debates? It was a freak-show of intolerance, willful ignorance and 1850’s thinking. Huntsman and Paul were the only class acts imo.
And do you see the Repubs hypocrisy on the ACA “job-lock” thing or the “banana republic” thing above. Or their hypocrisy on just about everything?
If you Repubs really cared about winning, you’d force your once proud party to get with the program. Quit being fire-breathing haters and obstructionists carrying water for the Koch Brothers and fueled by the fake wrath of AM radio. Your base is dying. Your party is dying on a national level. It’s 2014, not 1980.
I do wonder how you can tell forward from backward…
“America is going forward”……you left off the sarcasm tag.
I have zero interest in either party. However, what’s your guess on who most of these petitions signers voted for in the last Presidential election?
Our future leaders (ban guns and jail Americans):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n02qgqtpRKY
Then onward and upward (ban water):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi3erdgVVTw
I’m not sure about the “willful” part. However, I do notice something resembling ignorance:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtZb_mYoZug
No Rio, it’s very easy to understand. There are several directions that Obamacare can take:
1. Delay ALL the mandates, business and individual. Conservatives like this because it will delay the law into being effectively repealed. At the least, you can’t pay for the rest of the law without the mandates, so Congress can argue to repeal on grounds of saving money. However, this tactic failed. Repubs tried to shut the government and lost the PR war and still failed to delay Obamacare. So they move on to the next tactic:
2. Make everyone do ALL of the law ON schedule with NO delays at all. Individual, small, medium, big businesses, bad websites, warts and all, on time, no tolerance for failure, IRS in attack mode
etc. Conservatives like this too. It exposes all the bad parts of the law and makes it more attractive for Congress to argue to repeal on the grounds of killing babies, or throwing All-American dads in jail, or can’t-keep-your-health-plan (even though it was the insurance companies who yanked the plans, not Obama).
The first two are the all-or-nothing options. Conservatives like all-nothing black-white options because, you know, gray areas are, like, really scary.
3. Salvage the law. Let some stuff go forward, but delay other features to buy time to fix them. This is what Obama is doing now. That will make the law actually WORK, validate Obama as a President, and ring the eventual death knell for private insurance. Conservatives are trying to prevent “King Obama” from doing this, at all costs.
As for Krauthammer, if he didn’t want Obama to delay the 50-99 mandate, then he should have called up his small-business leader buddies. THEY were the ones that lobbied Obama to institute the delay.
Wow - so according to your logic - A president gets to decide which laws he wants to enforce, which laws he wants to delay and which laws he wants to cherry pick the parts he likes to enforce.
Why even have a congress? Why even vote?
And are you going to complain when a republican presidents does the exact same things?
Krauthhammer is an insider. A multimillionaire who feeds off the fat slow moving politicians that inhabit the Washington beltway like a remora feeding off the leftover bits that float around its host, the shark.
Obama is more like a broken, squeaky doorknob mounted on a public restroom door. Constantly being turned by people with dirty hands and always ending up back to the same exact position that he started at, without any positive measurable effect.
+3. Great prose.
He has no clue that the only reason he was allowed to assume and retain power was because his black face reduced the probability of riots while minorities lost decades of economic gains due to the delayed impact of globalization that became apparent when the housing bubble burst and people could not live by extracting 430 billion a year in housing equity.
He was put in place by a people more inclined towards fantasy than reality. Day by day their numbers are dwindling.
How to grow the economy….
——————
Study: The US really does have the highest corporate tax rate, loopholes and all
AEI | February 6, 2014 | James Pethokoukis
Source: Tax Foundation
Sure, the US may have the highest statutory corporate tax rate, but so what? No one pays that rate because of the all the tax breaks and other loopholes, right? A new analysis by the Tax Foundation offers some disturbing possible answers to those questions:
The marginal effective tax rate (METR) on corporate investment (i.e., the tax impact on capital investment as a portion of the cost of capital) is 35.3 percent in the U.S.—higher than in any other developed country. The U.S. has maintained the highest METR in the OECD since 2007, when Canada’s multiyear program of corporate tax reform brought its METR below the G-7 average. … The excessively high corporate income tax rate has become a cause of tax inefficiency and ineffectiveness by leading businesses to excessive tax planning and tax-induced avoidance of incorporation. … The findings dispel the misconception that while the U.S. statutory corporate tax rate is high, “loopholes” in the code make our effective tax rates competitive with those found in other developed countries.
Study: The US really does have the highest corporate tax rate, loopholes and all
The agendized Tax Foundation has been proven wrong many times.
“The Tax Foundation Relies on Flawed Research”
Bernie Sanders Is Right and the Tax Foundation Is Wrong: The U.S. Has Very Low Corporate Income Taxes Citizens for Tax Justice
…..The U.S. statutory tax rate of 35 percent is almost entirely irrelevant. The effective corporate tax rate (what corporations actually pay as a percentage of their profits) is what matters, and it’s far lower than the statutory corporate tax rate because of the loopholes that allow corporations to avoid taxes. The U.S. effective corporate tax rate is also far lower than the Tax Foundation claimed in a written response to Senator Sanders.
While the statutory corporate income tax rate for the U.S. may be high compared to those of other countries, the total federal corporate income tax collected in the U.S. in 2010 was equal to just 1.3 percent of our gross domestic product — in other words, 1.3 percent of our total economic output — according to the Treasury Department. The figure is 1.6 percent of GDP when state corporate income taxes are included.[3]
Data from the Organizations for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) show that the OECD countries other than the U.S. collected corporate tax revenue equal to 2.8 percent of their combined GDPs in 2010. This is another way of saying that the weighted average of corporate tax collected as a percentage of GDP for the countries that are the U.S.’s main trading partners and competitors was 2.8 percent in 2010. (2010 is the most recent year for which the OECD has complete data.)[4]
Some critics of corporate taxes claim that the declining share of the GDP paid in corporate income taxes collected in the U.S. reflects in part the growth in “pass-through” entities which are taxed only under the personal income tax and not under the corporate income tax. But almost all of the corporate income tax is paid by giant corporations, hardly any of which have shifted to pass-through status.[5]
In addition, effective corporate tax rates (on non-pass-through corporations) are very low in the United States, as CTJ has demonstrated in its comprehensive corporate tax reports.
One of the most cited of those reports was released in November of 2011 and examined most of the Fortune 500 companies that had been profitable each year over the 2008-10 period. Collectively, the companies studied paid just 18.5 percent of their profits in U.S. corporate income taxes over the three years that were studied — only half the 35 percent official corporate tax rate. Thirty of the companies paid less than nothing and had negative corporate income tax rates over that period.[6]
So if the rate is so low, why do small incorporated businesses have to pay so much? After S corp taxes are paid, profits pass thru and are taxed at income tax rates. If you go C corp, you pay the full corporate tax rate, then you pay dividend (capital gains) taxes on everything you send out to shareholders. WTF is going on there?
why do small incorporated businesses have to pay so much?
Because they are not in the big money, corporatist RichBoy’s club.
WTF is going on there?
Crony corporatist capitalism. Small business don’t have the money to lobby for the loopholes the big boys get.
I’d be for lowering the rate and closing most all loopholes but the big corporations won’t let it happen.
I think what’s going on is that billionaires can afford to buy Senators, which turns out to be cheaper (for them) than paying taxes. The result is a maze of tax laws that benefits the wealthiest ppl, at the expense of society in general.
The excessively high corporate income tax rate has become a cause of tax inefficiency and ineffectiveness by leading businesses to excessive tax planning and tax-induced avoidance of incorporation. ‘
Correct
excessively high corporate income tax rate….leading businesses to excessive tax planning and tax-induced avoidance of incorporation.
When I faced an “excessively high” tax rate in my business, my main tax planning included handing out bonuses/dividends where deserved and investing more money in my business.
(But I did invented the concept and no one else has ever done it.)
Rio,
All dividends are first subject to corporate tax on profits. so wtf ..?
All dividends are first subject to corporate tax on profits. so wtf ..?
I’m talking concepts more than terminology. One can legally classify as “bonuses” or distributions to working shareholders what has a lot in common with dividends. Then there are distributions and partnership draws, additional IRA funding etc. Having been at different times an owner, llc, partner and a major share holder in a Cali small business Corp, each one had different strategies to minimize corporate taxes.
But actually paying myself a nice bonus and having to pay taxes on it never really bothered me much.
A main point is that huge corporations have many, many ways to avoid high corporate taxes. Way more than small companies.
Looks like Lola just got caught admitting to tax fraud. Brazil? Hmmmmm.
” …the tax impact on capital investment as a portion of the cost of capital.”
What is the overall cost of capital in the United States, compared to other “developed countries”? (As if the offshoring was going to developed countries.)
¡Puerto Rico! ¡Independencia hoy!
Tax and spend and insane public unions works!
Wherever they are tried.
————–
To Avoid Becoming The Next Detroit, Puerto Rico Needs Growth, Not Taxes
IBD | 02/11/2014 | Editorial
Tax And Spend: Puerto Rico’s debt has been cut to junk by two credit rating agencies, prompting an outcry from officials of the recession-hit island that, after all, they’ve hiked taxes. Well, that’s the problem right there.
It’s hard to not feel some sympathy for Puerto Rico’s new governor, Alejandro Garcia Padilla, who upon entering office last year inherited a hog-wallow of $70 billion in debt, according to a long piece in the weekend’s New York Times.
The governor cut spending by 2%, balanced his budget a year ahead of schedule, reformed public pensions and reduced the territory’s deficit by 70%.
It wasn’t good enough. Moody’s cut the island’s credit rating two notches to Ba2 late last week, following Standard & Poor’s, which cut the municipal rating to BB+ a few days before that.
However, to make those numbers add up, he hiked taxes on corporations to 39%, far higher than the U.S. rate and well above the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development average, and let stand a regressive tax on small businesses, giving them a top rate as high as 130%, hitting businesses with the smallest margins, such as groceries, the hardest.
Combined with public employee unions controlling the electricity supply, forcing companies in a manufacturing-heavy economy to pay double what companies on the U.S. mainland pay, and an increasingly failed educational system — which has kept the workforce uncompetitive
However, to make those numbers add up, he hiked taxes on corporations to 39%, far higher than the U.S. rate and well above the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development average, and let stand a regressive tax on small businesses, giving them a top rate as high as 130%, hitting businesses with the smallest margins, such as groceries, the hardest.
Puerto Rico and Ireland compete for big pharma companies. Should say use to compete since PR with that tax rate will not attract anyone.
Lola doesn’t like my new handle, (but I ain’t HA). I can’t help it, he/she inspires me. Attacking Reagan is a calculated strategy to deal with two problems. 1. They cannot easily defend the Messiah and his policies which haven’t amounted to squat. 2. They also need to protect Clintons economic policies/legacy for Hillary’s future, including NAFTA. The solution to these is to go back even further and blame Reagan.
Salon and Slate twinks are setting the agenda for Lola, who continues to juggle mangos in his green shirt in front of that webcam.
Lola you are being used, you high net worth individual!
We love Lola.
Pointing out that Reagan’s Presidency has some glaring failures and nasty flaws that look worse and worse as the decades pass doesn’t mean people agree with NAFTA or with Obama.
IMO, we haven’t had a good President in my lifetime. No one that I would want to say “Yeah, that guy had it right in basically every way.” Closest was Bush 41 but he paid dearly for increasing taxes not as a political issue, but because he was looking at the structural deficit and the war expenses (gulf war) and wanted to act before deficits got out of hand. He also seemed genuine about wanting government to be solvent rather than projecting deficits far into the future to pay for entitlements (SS/MC) that would come a few decades after him.
Eisenhower FTW.
IMO, we haven’t had a good President in my lifetime.
+1
My biggest disappointments with Reagan were
1) The illegal alien shamnesty, which opened the floodgates for what became the Mexodus. As someone here pointed out the other day, if you don’t live in the Southwest, you probably have no idea of how massive the Mexodus is. It is so pervasive that Texas will soon become a blue state.
2) Deficits. He set the precedent for switching from “tax and spend” to “borrow and spend”, which actually made it easier for big government to happen, since it didn’t affect our take home pay.
Reagan’s policies were just more of turning the US into a beta nation that could (and was) picked clean by the upper echelons who make the real decisions. We haven’t had a real take-charge president in a long time. All we have now are people who respond to “advisors” and donors. This is regardless of whether they profess to be accountable (like Obama pretends) or laughably refer to themselves as “the Decider” (like W). Yes, they decide to do whatever they are told.
“My biggest disappointments with Reagan were…”
3) The trial lawyer’s joint and several liability has certainly helped to ruin private aviation. In addition, it has also led to massive increases in health care costs.
“Attacking Reagan is a calculated strategy to deal with two problems. 1. They cannot easily defend the Messiah and his policies which haven’t amounted to squat. 2. They also need to protect Clintons economic policies/legacy for Hillary’s future, including NAFTA. The solution to these is to go back even further and blame Reagan.”
Exactly. Obama will leave the economic situation in a far worse situation than he inherited. It is not just the fact that he will have added about ten trillion in debt. It includes the Federal Reserve’s balanced sheet. Cutting back on the speed you are digging the hole is not the same as filling the hole. The federal reserve had just over $800 billion on its balanced sheet when this mess started. Even at a $65 billion a month pace, we will add that this year alone. The Fed will need to sell $4 trillion in securities to get back to its old balance sheet. How do you do that without raising interest rates dramatically causing the U.S. to pay more in interest and slowing the economy both of which cause the deficit to rise even more? Additionally since the Fed will be losing on its holdings it will not be sending “profits” to the U.S. government raising the deficit even more.
The economy on its own was recovering by June 2009, many Democrats such as Howard Dean expected a V shape economy. Natural economic forces such as lower gasoline prices, reduced housing costs etc. were starting to put additional money in people’s pockets. Now, a non-intervention would not have been good for Wall Street, the big banks would have had to sold off assets to the fiscally responsible regional banks and many billionaires would have lost everything. All Obama has done is make Wall Street’s problems main street’s problems. The free market if allowed to work would have reduced inequality in America but instead we received socialist rhetoric but policies designed to create more inequality. Now, between the national debt and the federal reserve balanced sheet, we are looking at decades of slow growth. Obama not only cost everyone on this board the ability to buy houses at very distressed prices from desperate banks, he has imposed upon us decades of subpar growth.
Obama is not acting alone! We’ve got the whole gang of Congress to thank.
Decades of subpar growth wouldn’t be that bad for the majority of people. Unfortunately, subpar growth is what we’ve been having during the biggest debt fueled stimulus ever, and it appears now that is unsustainable. What comes next is not “growth”.
Why did we have a housing bubble? What’s gutted the American middle-class? What’s caused endless financial bubbles and what’s caused wealth and income inequality to skyrocket? Ben says the main cause is globalization and central-bankism. I think the main cause is America’s 34 year experiment in Supply-Side, rich-worshiping policies.
We both could are right imo. This article indicates both are very much related and started to go off the reservation in about 1980 - when the entire American economic system began its embrace of Trickle-down and Supply-Side’s deregulation letting the financial industry off its short leash to enrich a few and wreak havoc on the many. Central Banks/Finance run amok, globalization and Supply-Side are very much related. The charts and dates here are by themselves worth a look.
Want To Reduce Income/Wealth Inequality? Abolish The Engine Of Inequality - The Federal Reserve
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-01-28/want-reduce-incomewealth-inequality-abolish-engine-inequality-federal-reserve
While many key drivers of declining income are structural and not “fixable” with conventional policies (globalization of labor and the “end of work” replacement of human labor by robots, automation and software, to name the two most important ones), the financial policies that create wealth/income inequality are made right here in the U.S.A. by the Federal Reserve.
The Fed generates wealth/income inequality in three basic ways:
….The housing bubble was not just a credit bubble; it was a credit bubble enabled by the securitization/financialization of the primary household asset, the home.
…..Here’s how cheap, abundant credit–supposedly the key engine of growth, according to the Federal Reserve–massively increases wealth inequality: Credit has rendered even the upper-income middle class family debt-serfs, while credit has greatly increased the opportunities for the wealthy to buy rentier income streams.
…..Credit used to purchase unproductive consumption creates debt-serfdom; credit used to buy rentier assets adds to wealth and income. Unfortunately the average household does not have access to the credit required to buy productive assets; only the wealthy possess that perquisite.
….But that isn’t the end of the destructive consequences of Fed policy: the Federal Reserve has also created a neofeudal society in which debt enslaves the masses and enriches the financial Elites.
…..This Fed-enabled financial wealth destroys democracy and free markets when it buys the machinery of governance.
……Unfortunately, only the top 1/10th of 1% can “afford” this kind of Fed-funded “democracy.
It’s Boomers, man. Boomers just boom, it’s what they do. Worst generation ever. On one hand, they’re fanatic about low taxes for themselves. But they crave asset appreciation and free stuff for themselves (government checks).
George Carlin nailed it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1Sal6N5OiE (short clip, absolutely hilarious)
, they’re fanatic about low taxes for themselves. But they crave asset appreciation
“they” - “Every single one”
Gotta love collectivists.
Capitalism results in unequal prosperity.
Socialism results in equal poverty.
Socialism results in equal poverty.
Except for the people in power. Animal Farm/Soviet Union/North Korea etc.
It’s Boomers, man. Boomers just boom, it’s what they do. Worst generation ever.
Except for their children. Fatter, dumber but having more self-esteem. SAT scores showing that you are dumber than your parents, reset the mean. Not enough of an improvement, cheat on your exams. All the studies have shown what I have just stated. We have Obama because of your generation not the boomers, that says it all.
Data fallacy. More people are taking the SAT, esp at lower income levels and minority populations.
At top schools, it’s much harder now–scores are way up, meritocracy is up. You could get into HYP undergrad with like a 1300 a few generations ago. The thought is laughable now.
You have Obama because of several decades of poor decisions prior (think wars, most notably) and also because the GOP became an idiocracy at its highest levels.
It’s risible that the GOP/Paul Ryan plan to cut the deficit means allowing people 50+ to keep full SS/Medicare benefits while young people who will get shafted get to pay for it all. LOL for days. All because they know the only group that votes GOP in mass is white boomers.
The SAT also used to be used mostly on the West Coast and Northeast. Nowadays essentially every school accepts the SAT and the majority require the SAT. So you have a lot of people in the south and Midwest who used to take the ACT but now take the SAT.
Way back when testing started, it was top schools requiring the SAT. State schools adopted later and many would allow or even prefer the ACT.
Sorry Joey but the actual IQ of this nation has dropped over the last few decades. That is unprecedented. It is not just a question of more people taking the SAT test. Also, the weight and honesty surveys show your generation to be fatter and more dishonest. Now, I will agree that much of this has been caused by immigration but still it means that your generation is worse than the baby boomers so deal with it. Better yet stop tying to fault a whole generation. The greatness of this country was thinking about people as individuals with individual rights and if we move from that type of thinking and lump people into groups we diminish the nation.
less fighting more studying that’s what i’m seeing in schools these days.
I think they throw you out of school for fighting now ?
The discussion was about policies of generations. The Boomers have held power and performed worse than any generation in the past century. Millenials are just making a start in the world. It remains to be seen what choices we’ll be faced with and have to make.
As far as Boomers, they have created more debt than any previous generation. It is disgusting. And the GOP’s idea to cut the debt is, in fact, to continue paying full SS and MC to people 50+ while cutting it for younger generations.
Those are facts. The Boomers are far worse than their parents’ and grandparents’ generations. Look at the Boomer Presidents — Clinton and W. Terrible, both sold us down the river economically and W started wars we couldn’t pay for while giving us Medicare Part D for old people.
As far as what Millenials will do in power, unless Generation X goes away, there’s still another decade or so before we really find out. The choices we’ll be faced with will be tough. I don’t know what the challenges will be in, say, 2025, but that’s about the time you’d expect to see Millenials voting and taking up public offices in significant numbers.
Albeq: > The greatness of this country was thinking about people as individuals with individual rights and if we move from that type of thinking and lump people into groups we diminish the nation.
That is the biggest load of crap I have ever heard. Ever heard of something called the revolutionary war? or the civil war? or.. any war? that’s where we lump a big group of people together, label them the enemy, then pound the snot out of them with our army. You don’t really worry about the “individual” as you pump a 30 caliber round through his face… you worry he might do it to you because he is an “other”
We HABITUALLY screw anyone over who isn’t “like us”; American Indians to start, right up to racial profiling of middle easterners today to go along with our continued occupation of Afghanistan (why is that again?).
You might not like what the group you belong to is doing and labeled as, but it doesn’t change the fact that that group is collectively bending over future generations in favor of their own self interest. Maybe it’s a good thing that you don’t want to be associated with them, but maybe you should be doing more to make change happen from the inside also.
“That is the biggest load of crap I have ever heard. Ever heard of something called the revolutionary war? or the civil war? or.. any war? that’s where we lump a big group of people together, label them the enemy, then pound the snot out of them with our army. You don’t really worry about the “individual” as you pump a 30 caliber round through his face… you worry he might do it to you because he is an “other””
The U.S. constitution creates individual rights it does not create group rights. Countries such as Lebanon create group rights, a person from a certain religious group is given one position etc. I prefer the legal framework we have that was possible due to the revolutionary war. The civil war happened because we did lump people together. However, it was followed by the 13th and 14th amendment which may the concept of individual rights apply to the states. Your examples do not contradict what I said this country works best when we treat people like individuals and not try to bestow rights based on group status.
may=made
But they crave asset appreciation and free stuff for themselves (government checks).
It’s only welfare/free cheese when someone else gets it.
Yeah, like inch by inch who wants a special, extra reduction of property taxes just for her own age group.
Why did we have a housing bubble? What’s gutted the American middle-class?
Bush/Clinton/Bush II when they opened the U.S. to Chinese made goods and then covered the destruction of U.S. manufacturing with bubbles housing and the Internet bubble. Nothing to do with Reagan. The country needs supply side economics more than ever. True supply side economics is giving incentives to produce goods not create programs to create more demand that often times is satisfied with foreign goods. If you understood this basic concept, you would not be attacking Reagan but the presidents that followed him and turned the country to globalization. Thatcher was pushed out of office by her own party because the Conservatives made the same move as the Republicans. She had a big left mango despite being a woman.
Bush/Clinton/Bush II when they opened the U.S. to Chinese made goods and then covered the destruction of U.S. manufacturing with bubbles housing and the Internet bubble. Nothing to do with Reagan.
It has everything to do with Reagan but Reagan is not the only one at fault. Reagan was the first effective preacher of the failed philosophy. Bush/Clinton/Bush II and Obama are following the path and Trickle-down philosophy laid down by Reagan. Globalization and job destroying is a key part of Trickle-down because it encourages more wealth to funnel to the rich. Bubbles and financial excess are the results of Trickle-down.
When I assail “ReaganOmics” I am not just assailing Reagan. Reagan did some good things too. I’m assailing the failed “Trickle-down” philosophy our entire political system has adhered to for 34 years, but yes, Reagan got the ball rolling.
True supply side economics is giving incentives to produce goods
This is not 1880 or even 1980. It’s 2014. The world is awash in production capability. We have supply coming out of our ears, everywhere. And the world is awash in wealth but in too few hands. Supply-side failed. It stripped all our wealth from the demand side. Look around.
“The world is awash in production capability”.
Build it better or build it cheaper and the world will still buy it and the Chinese production capacity will become worthless, bad for the globalists good for the country. Supply side economics still can help that happen. Do you think that Reagan would leave hundreds of billions of dollars of corporate profits overseas just for the remote possibility that some taxes might come from that money, no he would remove the double taxation and bring it back to be invested in U.S. production just one example and it would it would create tax revenue not cost tax revenue since we receive no taxes on the money now.
he would remove the double taxation and bring it back to be invested in U.S. production
But herein lies some problems Trickle-down has wrought.
1. Why would that repatriated money be invested in US production when Trickle-Down removed most import duties? They’d just make stuff overseas. Until duties are raised (Over trickldown fan’s dead bodies) and major structural changes are made to boost demand, that money will just go in some hedge fund or the like.
2. Why does USA need that money to be invested in US production? It would not make much difference imo. Besides my point #1 above, due to trickle-down the USA is already awash in a flood of capital - but all in too few hands. There is no demand.
You create demand in this country if you create jobs. You do not seem to understand about sunk costs. I do not care that China has many steel plants. Bring back the cheap capital and you will have people invest in steel plants since with the cheap NG and cheap scrap steel, you can produce steel cheaper in the U.S. than China. If China tries to still dump steel despite having higher costs, we have laws to address dumping, you just need a president to enforce the laws. With the rise of labor costs in China and the decline in the costs of robotic labor, this country is ripe for a manufacturing rebirth, however you do not get there by thinking more SNAP and extended unemployment is the way to create demand. Nor do you get there by artificially inflating housing and stock prices, you get there by old school supply side economics.
Amen, brothah!
Bring back the cheap capital and you will have people invest in steel plants
That does not jibe with our reality.
We have the cheapest capital in the history of the industrialized world right now and have for years. We have individuals and corporations sitting on mountains of real capital in America with the the ability to borrow even more of the cheapest capital in the world.
We have all that. It’s here - the result of failed theories practiced for 3 decades. We live did it. Supply-Side failed.
you do not get there by thinking more SNAP and extended unemployment is the way to create demand
SNAP and UE are simply bandaids applied because Supply-Side and our worshiping of the rich at our expense failed.
Thank you, and while it is easy to see who would benefit from supply side economics, think who would be negatively impacted. The banksters and the big corporations have loaned or invested trillions in the EMs to build manufacturing plants. What would happen to all those sunk costs if the U.S. started to manufacture its own goods again? Thus, the need to try to discredit supply side economics before someone like Cruz actually runs on those policies and we try to produce our own goods.
Bring back the cheap capital and you will have people invest in steel plants (In the USA)
As we know, we have the cheapest capital possible, and tons of it. Here’s Romney’s old company (Bain) wringing their hands a week after the election because the rich and corporations (The Supply) has so much capital that they don’t know what to do with.
Spoiler Alert: They’re not talking about building steel plants in Ohio with their mountains of cheap capital. The world has money coming out of its ears. (Just way too few ears)
A world awash in money
“The growing challenge: Too much capital”
http://www.bain.com/publications/articles/a-world-awash-in-money.aspx
…… By 2010, global capital had swollen to some $600 trillion, tripling over the past two decades. Today, total financial assets are nearly 10 times the value of the global output of all goods and services…..
……Our analysis leads us to conclude that for the balance of the decade, markets will generally continue to grapple with an environment of capital superabundance. Even with moderating financial growth in developed markets, the fundamental forces that inflated the global balance sheet since the 1980s—financial innovation, high-speed computing and reliance on leverage—are still in place.
….Prepare for bubble risks. Capital superabundance will increase the frequency, intensity, size and longevity of asset bubbles. The propensity for bubbles to form will be magnified
1. The growing challenge: Too much capital
The expansion of the financial sector has accounted for an increasing share of world economic growth for years. The shift began with the end of the Bretton Woods system in the early 1970s and has accelerated since the 1980s with the advent of financial engineering, computing power and regulatory changes that reinforced it. The steady, decades-long buildup of financial capital has masked the fact that real economic growth was slowing.
It only looks like capital. It is a mountain of credit with a grain of capital. Like a monster game of Jenga, a minor loss somewhere can crash the entire thing.
“…taxes…”
This morning I checked my bank account, and there was my 2014 tax return, deposited yesterday. I just filed them last week on the fourth, electronically. I’ve been using TurboTax on-line, and gotta tell ‘ya their services rank up there with the invention of the wheel.
It is true Turbo Tax is great but I am still waiting for one of my brokerage accounts to give me my trading information.
Another thumbs up for TT. Been using since 1999 and it’s a breeze. All paperless.
“and Obama are following the path and Trickle-down philosophy laid down by Reagan.”
Thanks for admitting the Messiah is also to blame. And as the current office holder, and a professed leftist, I guess even more so.
Obama = Reaganite.
Inflection point is becoming obvious December 19 2013 (GLD vs S&P 500)
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=^GSPC&t=3m&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=GLD
Even more: Emerging markets, gold and the S&P 500 indexes in a 3 month period show a shift happening.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=3m&s=^GSPC&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=GLD%2C+VEIEX%2C+&ql=1
Most people are unaware emerging markets have been on a downtrend for over a year. So the recent activity of gold up, stocks down is more than from the performance of emerging markets.
Junior gold mining versus S&P 500 the last 6 months
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=GDXJ&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=^GSPC
paradigm shift
GDXJ broached $41 this morning.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-11/gold-climbs-to-2014-high-to-head-for-longest-rally-since-august.html
To summarize all the important stories of the day in one sentence: China buys, Obama lies and the middle class cries.
Every time I look today gold it seems to be trading higher getting closer to $1300 but PMs are still being manipulated so I have written more short term call options. I think it is very interesting that platinum is not moving more. Around 60% of the world’s production of platinum is on strike in SA but there has been very little movement in the price of platinum. Unless someone knows that a settlement is going to occur soon, it does not make much sense. However, silver is acting similarly so maybe the market is just saying that the world’s economy is weak. This is another problem caused by manipulation, signals are being distorted making it harder for people to plan.
There is only so much the manipulators can do before the market forces on precious metals fight back. If you think otherwise, I present to you the POG from 2001 to 2011. Unless you think the same manipulators pushed gold up for 10 years? What good would that do? Precious metals is not a popular asset at all in the world. Stocks are the biggest asset class. Fiat money is also big. Government securities - big.
I have no awe of the manipulators’ power. They are not all powerful. They are socialists by the fact that they are using artificial (government) means to try to push down the price.
Just like in housing - manipulators have been working for 7 years or so to prop up the house prices to overpriced levels.
There is only so much they can do but the demographics, the huge amount of young people deep in student debt - they won’t take the bait and they cannot afford the artificially high priced houses.
Market forces happen. Unintended consequences happen.
Oh GDXJ pierced its 200 day MA today. And it’s been above the 50 day MA. Betters on miners bought. Investors will buy only when the 50 day MA is above the 200 day MA and the stock price is above the 50 day MA.
I’m betting on miners.
Get your wallets out you deadbeat debt-donkeys.
http://picpaste.com/pics/6hoz4y9T.1392132309.png
“Get your wallets out you deadbeat debt-donkeys.”
+1 Beat ‘ya to it this morning.
Feb 11, 2014 07:48:39 PST | Transaction ID: ********WF601020L
You sent a payment of $100.00 USD to Benjamin Jones
Will the cascading defaults begin with China or will something else precipitate the China collapse?
Will the cascading defaults begin with China or will something else precipitate the China collapse?
Hitting the resource wall, will cause China to implode. Thus, China’s moves to obtain African natural resources and claim resources in Asia. If they can obtain the resources they can avoid the collapse. They are a wounded animal and as we all know a wounded animal is often times the most dangerous.
There is no resource wall. There is a credit rubber band that can snap. That will smack China and we will all get knocked back.
That’s what I’m thinking.
China is almost out of cheap water and cheap coal, it is not talked about much but when you are producing low margin goods that consume tons of both of them, it is critical. Japan is about to turn back to nuclear power because the cost of importing fossil fuels turned large trade surpluses into deficits. Do not underestimate the importance of natural resources or the lack thereof.
A reply seems to be lost in cyberspace. Sorry if it appears later. China is running out of cheap water and cheap coal and they are essential in producing things like steel. With the low margins they have on steel, it may cause defaults on loans. The amount of loans in China would not be a problem if they have been made to profitable companies. Thus, resource shortages and the credit rubber band are much more intertwined than you realize.
I’m not neglecting the importance of resources (cheap labor being another one that is ebbing away). They aren’t going to run out of anything like hitting a wall, they will become stretched. I think they are already well stretched. Like you say, they’ve pissed in their cereal bowl and burned the floorboards. I personally think that they will start selling their stockpiles to pay the bills. When the collateral for their Ponzi loans is sold off, the defaults will begin in earnest. I’m watching the price of copper.
I don’t have to duck, I’ve already bugged out!
http://peakoil.com/consumption/electric-companies-relying-too-much-on-natural-gas
Pro nuclear but makes good points.
Is it safe to assume the stock market has successfully dodged the January bullet and is on track to ever-higher levels for the remainder of 2014?
Don’t allow superficial similarities between recent stock price moves and those in 1929 spook you. Buy stocks, as they are well known to always go up in the post-Greenspan era.
LIVE BLOG AND VIDEO: Fed’s Yellen testifies before House committee
Frightening 1929 market chart is gaining traction
Commentary: Mark Hulbert on parallels between recent market behavior and just before 1929 crash.
They aren’t “emerging”. They’ve been around longer than us.
Does renewed stock market strength indicate the EM crisis died in the cradle?
Politics and Policy
Fed’s Yellen Sets a Steady Policy Course
Chairwoman Says U.S. Labor Market Recovery ‘Far From Complete’
By Victoria McGrane and Pedro Nicolaci da Costa
Updated Feb. 11, 2014 11:22 a.m. ET
Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen testifies before the House Financial Services Committee on Tuesday in Washington. Associated Press
WASHINGTON—The new leader of the Federal Reserve, Janet Yellen, on Tuesday told lawmakers she expects there to be “a great deal of continuity” in the central bank’s policies in testimony at her first congressional appearance since becoming the central bank’s chairwoman.
“I served on the Committee as we formulated our current policy strategy and I strongly support that strategy,” Ms. Yellen said in her remarks prepared for delivery before the House Financial Services Committee.
Ms. Yellen signaled that recent soft economic data haven’t swayed the central bank from a strategy of trimming its monthly bond purchases by $10 billion at each of its policy meetings this year. She repeated language from the Fed’s January policy statement, saying that if the economy improves as the Fed expects, the Fed “will likely reduce the pace of asset purchases in further measured steps at future meetings.”
She also emphasized that the bond-buying program is “not on a preset course” and officials will base their decisions about the pace of the program on their economic outlook as well as their view of the costs and benefits of the program. The Fed cut the bond purchases to $65 billion per month at its January meeting. The program aims to spur investment, hiring and spending by pushing down long-term borrowing costs. The Fed’s next meeting is March 18-19.
Emerging-Market Tumult
Ms. Yellen also said U.S. central bank policy was aimed at domestic economic objectives and couldn’t be blamed for market volatility overseas.
While she acknowledged open global capital markets meant some of the effects of Fed policy spill over into other countries, Ms. Yellen added Fed officials had tried to be very clear about their intentions to eventually unwind their bond-buying program.
“We’ve been very clear at the outset that we initiated our program of asset purchases and an accommodative monetary policy more generally to pursue the goals that Congress has assigned to the Federal Reserve,” Ms. Yellen told lawmakers. “We’ve tried to be as clear as we possibly can as to how we would conduct this policy, and it’s been quite clear at the outset that as our recovery advanced we would wind down or reduce the pace of asset purchases.”
The Fed’s monetary-policy report, published Tuesday in conjunction with Ms. Yellen’s testimony, argued that adverse events overseas rather than shifts in Fed policy were responsible for recent market volatility.
…
Coutts Says Emerging-Market Crisis ’Talk’ as Wealthy Buy
By Dale Crofts Feb 10, 2014 1:36 AM PT
Coutts & Co., the wealth management unit of Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc (RBS), said it doesn’t see a crisis in emerging markets and the firm’s rich clients are taking advantage of this year’s declines to boost holdings.
“If you look at the balance of trade that our clients are doing, they’re buying,” Gary Dugan, the chief investment officer in Asia and the Middle East for Coutts, which counts Queen Elizabeth II among its clients, said in a interview yesterday in Dubai. “There’s been an appetite for Asia and for Russia after the sell-off. There’s no crisis, it’s just talk.”
…
Blankfein Says Emerging Markets in Better State Than in ‘98
Tuesday, 11 Feb 2014 08:14 AM
Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Chief Executive Officer Lloyd C. Blankfein said emerging markets are better able to weather an investor retreat now than in 1998, when currency turmoil spread and forced international bailouts.
“There were a lot of things in ’98 that don’t exist now,” Blankfein, 59, said in an interview with Bloomberg Television’s John Dawson in Hong Kong while attending the Goldman Sachs Global Macro conference. Those markets now have “better reserves, more flexibility in exchange rates, better policy orientation,” he said.
Emerging-market stocks posted their worst start to a year since 2009, evoking comparisons with the Asian financial crisis, as China’s economy slowed and the U.S. Federal Reserve began paring monetary stimulus. Investors including Mark Mobius, who oversees $50 billion in developing-nation assets at Templeton Emerging Markets Group, are predicting the worst isn’t over.
“There were tailwinds for the emerging markets over the last several years” with low interest rates globally attracting funds into those markets and commodity prices climbing, Blankfein said. “The risk returns to roost, not possibly, but inevitably. It has to. It’s part of a cycle.”
In the late 1990s, Asian nations including South Korea and Thailand spent reserves trying to defend exchange-rate pegs, only to eventually devalue and seek International Monetary Fund bailouts. As currencies became delinked from the U.S. dollar, investors attacked in waves that culminated in Russia’s debt default and the collapse of hedge fund Long Term Capital Management.
‘Tsunami Coming’
“Barriers were defended, and when they gave way, it was like a tsunami coming through a dike,” Blankfein said of that crisis. “Central banks of those countries were very underwhelming,” while governments were trying to hold currencies at untenable rates, he said.
What happened in 1998 “wasn’t the end of the world” and those countries have been “doing very well” for the last 10 to 12 years, Blankfein said.
“It’s going to be like three steps forward, one step back,” he said. “Money was flowing very freely — in some cases, maybe freer than it should have — into emerging markets and that’s going to have to consolidate.”
China’s economic growth will have “huge consequences” for global expansion prospects, though his firm will be judicious in how it invests in the Asian nation, the CEO said.
…
Jim Rogers: “Be Worried & Be Careful…The Emerging Market Crisis Is Not Over Yet”
Tyler Durden’s picture
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 02/09/2014 21:53 -0500
UBS’ George Magnus believes the next global economic “crisis”‘ lightning rod will be the emerging markets and as Jim Rogers tells BoomBust’s Erin Ade in this brief interview, “the emerging market crisis has only just begun.” While Rogers is careful to add that there are lots of emerging markets - “some better than others;” he warns that “there are some serious problems out there and they are going to get worse.” Who is to blame? The Fed, of course - “by driving rates so low and providing as much liquidity as anyone in the world could want, the EMs have borrowed to cover up their real problems… be worried.”
I actually think this year the s and p 500 will be up by most 5 percent. More likely the index will finish the year lower than on January 2.
Banks have got a fantastic business model. I put my money in the bank, they pay me essentially nothing, then they lend it out for 5-10% interest. On top of that they turn around and charge me various fees as though they’re doing me a favor by accepting my money.
Ahh, regulatory capture, is there any finer thing?
You don’t have to pay fees to use a bank.
A few weeks or maybe a month ago, I said that the U.S. economy was like a rocket that was running out of rocket fuel before it achieved escaped velocity, thus it was heading for a crash, more evidence:
Job openings in the U.S. decreased by 43,000 to 3.99 million in December from a revised 4.03 million the prior month, the Labor Department said today in Washington. The pace of hiring slowed.
To contact the reporter on this story: Shobhana Chandra in Washington at schandra1@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Carlos Torres at ctorres2@bloomberg.net
The rocket never even left the pad.
If we had the same labor participation rate today and the day obama took office - unemployment would be 11%+
Add in adding more to the debt than ALL the previous presidents COMBINED…
On the ground from the Inland Empire
Our house hunt continues. We’ve visited a dozen open houses. Not much out there that we’d like to spend $400K+ on. The stuff that’s $350k and below is utter shit dilapidated 1950s-1970s boxes on small lots. A couple houses have been interesting to us but the sellers are pricing themselves out of the market with asking prices per square foot that are 20-30% above any recent sales.
Learned a couple important facts that make me think that every day we delay is a plus for our bottom line.
1. Dodd-Frank is in full force. One real estate agent at an open house had a nice chart showing closings by month over the last 8 months. January had about a 40% drop in closings in Riverside, he presumed due to the new rules.
2. FHA limits of $355k are probably more important to explain the January decline. Tons of buyers were using these 3.5% down loans and bidding up prices. This is the stupid money and it’s now gone from the $400-$500k market. Hooray! How long until sellers get a clue?
3. Contrary to what I have heard, the seller’s agent’s data showed listings were up over the last 6 months. Still only a ~2 mo. supply of homes, and we’re not too impressed with what we’ve seen, but it’s better than it was in mid 2013.
More to come. We’re spending the next few weekends looking in Chino/Chino Hills, Corona, and Claremont.
“January had about a 40% drop in closings in Riverside, he presumed due to the new rules.”
The decline in closings actually began last May when rates started up again. It was precipitous then, 2x worse now with FHA ceilings getting lowered. Prices resumed falling then as dumb.borrowed.money began to evaporate.
Keep this in mind…. Knowing everything you know and learned here of the realtor, mortgage and housing fraud and the massive govt price fixing of housing, If you had $500k in loose cash, would you consider buying a house in the current environment? Even for a second?
I would not commit to a cash purchase, but I would use 4:1 leverage as an inflation hedge, so long as I get to enjoy the property and it works out to less than my current rent payment.
You would willingly double your costs by financing but wouldn’t halve your cost by paying cash.
Gotcha
And what inflation are you talking about?
I didn’t say there was inflation, just that it would be a hedge against it in case it came. Surely this is a possibility with the Fed’s e-printing.
We would feel perfectly happy if our payment was less than our current rent, regardless of interest being paid to a bank, as long as the quality of home is such that we enjoy living there for the next decade.
In any case, I am not in the position of paying $500,000 in cash.
I didn’t say you had the cash. It was a hypothetical.
“leverage as an inflation hedge…”
Leverage is a very good inflation hedge in a credit expansion (inflation). We’ve just had the biggest one in history and the wheels have been falling off. So what comes next you think is inflation…
If you have hard assets, like a house, the hedge is cash not debt.
Debt is not kind in a Credit Crunch.
See? I told you. You will remain a renter until the full correction comes. I know you better than you know yourself. Ahhh, I love this blog (but I didn’t like SlithieTard).
Also, I saw some discussion about LendingClub yesterday. If anyone has questions about this company or direct lending in general, fire away. I’ll share what I can. I follow the industry very closely and, in addition to my personal investments ($100k), I manage a multi-million dollar institutional portfolio of LendingClub loans. This is just a side project for me, but it’s been a great opportunity!
I think that if social media has any role other than for people to post that they are heading for the 7/11, it is creating a way to duplicate small town trust. This trust was built on reputation and people could make loans based on trust and have a better chance of being repaid than relying on a credit score. Government regulation is a poor substitute for the equivalent of identifying a person that you know can be trusted with a handshake. I cannot endorse any particular company but I do believe that the difference between many a third world country and the United States of my youth is the ability to enter into a transaction without undue fear of dishonesty.
Hey Dan.
I just want to let you know that I plan on getting Subway for din-din, so I won’t be at 7-11 this afternoon.
I like Subway but I was a bit disturbed about the chemicals in the bread. I don’t want to be too much of a rubber man. Thanks for the status update please keep me posted on what type of sub you buy.
Enjoy your meal:
(CNN) — Take a look at ingredients for some varieties of Subway’s bread and you’ll find a chemical that may seem unfamiliar and hard to pronounce: azodicarbonamide.
To say this word, you would emphasize the syllable “bon” — but the attention the chemical has been getting has not been good. Besides bread, the chemical is also found in yoga mats and shoe soles to add elasticity.
But it’s not long for bread at Subway: The company says it’s coming out.
“We are already in the process of removing azodicarbonamide as part of our bread improvement efforts despite the fact that it is (a) USDA and FDA approved ingredient,” Subway said in a statement. “The complete conversion to have this product out of the bread will be done soon.”
The controversial chemical has been used by commercial bakers for the purpose of strengthening dough but has been poorly tested, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest.
One of the breakdown products, derived from the original substance, is called urethane, a recognized carcinogen, the organization says. Using azodicarbonamide at maximum allowable levels results in higher levels of urethane in bread “that pose a small risk to humans,” CSPI said.
Another breakdown product is semicarbazide, which poses “a negligible risk to humans” but was found to cause cancers of the lung and blood vessels in mice, CSPI said.
CSPI advocates for reducing the amount of the chemical that is allowed to be used.
“We urge the Food and Drug Administration to consider whether the Delaney amendment, which bars the use of food additives that cause cancer in humans or animals, requires the agency to bar its use,” CSPI said.
The FDA has said that the additive cannot exceed 0.0045% by weight of the flour when used in as a “dough conditioner.”
The American Bakers Association told CNN: “Past FDA sampling results have indicated appropriate low level use in products. As a dough conditioner it has a volume/texture effect on the finished loaf. It is a functional ingredient that improves the quality of bread and any substitutes are likely not to work as well as ADA (azodicarbonamide).”
Food blogger Vani Hari, of the popular food blog Food Babe, originally drew public attention to this issue, CSPI said. She has written about Subway ingredients several times since 2012, this week she launched a petition urging Subway to stop using azodicarbonamide. More than 67,000 people signed.
Grocery store breads and restaurant breads also contain this chemical. Other major fast food chains have products with the ingredient too, including McDonald’s, Starbucks and Arby’s.
McDonald’s has also responded to concerns about the chemical with regard to its McRib sandwich buns, but continues to use the chemical in that product.
McDonald’s notes on its website that a “variation of Azodicarbonamide has commercial uses and is used in the production of some foamed plastics, like exercise mats. But this shouldn’t be confused with the food-grade variation of this ingredient.”
Azodicarbonamide is not legally allowed to be used as a dough improver in the European Union, according to the European Food Safety Authority. It is also banned in Australia.
A 1999 report from an international group of health experts, published by the World Health Organization, says some studies suggest that the chemical can induce asthma, based on evidence from people with symptoms and employees of facilities where the chemical is manufactured or used.
But use of the chemical in the workplace is very different, and carries much greater exposure than eating a tiny amount in bread.
The report notes that the concentration required to produce asthmatic reactions is unknown.
“The level of risk is uncertain; hence, exposure levels should be reduced as much as possible,” WHO said.
CNN’s William Hudson contributed to this report.
idc.
I was in the habit of baking my own bread for a long time, but it’s been a little hectic for me lately with the dual residency, so I haven’t baked in a couple months. I bought a loaf from the grocery store about a month ago, and I still have two unmoldy slices in my cupboard (not fridge). I am planning on baking again this weekend.
Remind me on Friday. If I don’t remember to start it on Friday night when I get home, then it will be too late.
I keep my wheat consumption to a minimum but I agree that any bread that does not develop mold over a month’s time is highly suspect.
Developer D.R. Horton stops taking mineral rights, for now
by Kim Miller
D.R. Horton, which has six communities in Palm Beach County, began sending letters last week pledging to return mineral rights it removed during sales, and to end the practice until legislative clarification is given.
The Texas-based home builder was severing the mineral rights from below properties it sold in Florida, simultaneously conveying those rights to a subsidiary, DRH Energy, Inc.
Florida Attorney General Palm Bondi said Friday about 18,000 Floridians will receive a letter saying they have the option to receive their mineral rights back.
The practice of keeping mineral rights by developers was highlighted last year in several new stories.
In a Dec. 6 letter to Bondi, D.R. Horton Chief Counsel O. KIenneth Bagwell said the company will “revisit” the issue if lawmakers have not acted by Jan. 1, 2015.
D.R. Horton has communities in Boynton Beach, Delray Beach, Greenacres, Lake Worth
Tags: bnblogs, dr horton
This entry was posted on Monday, February 10th, 2014 at 9:14 am and is filed under Housing boom, Mortgages. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
I wonder if there’s a sinkhole angle they want out of…
The Telegraph:
If salaries had risen as fast as house prices since 1997, an average couple would earn £44,000 a year more today
House price inflation has been so extreme in recent years that had wages kept pace, many of us would be earning tens of thousands of pounds more each year.
In the most expensive regions the house price-earnings gap crosses the £100,000 barrier.
In the borough of Westminster in London, for instance, the average annual household’s earnings would have to be £158,000 higher today than is actually the case, had earnings risen in line with house prices in the area.
The calculations, undertaken by housing charity Shelter, are based on official, regional house prices and earnings data taken from 1997. These are then compared with equivalent data from 2012.
Shelter has then run the comparisons for both single-earner households and couples with and without children. The Westminster figure, above, relates to a couple with children.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/houseprices/10630725/House-prices-if-wages-had-kept-up-wed-earn-44000-more.html
Child Interrogated And Suspended After Voluntarily “Turning In” Toy Gun At School
Officials demand 11-year-old undergo counseling and “psychiatric evaluation”
Steve Watson
Infowars.com
February 11, 2014
In yet another case of ‘zero tolerance’ insanity in schools, an 11-year-old boy was interrogated without the knowledge of his parents, and then suspended after he accidentally brought a plastic toy gun to school.
What makes this case stand out is that fact that 6th grader, Caden Cook, actually knew he shouldn’t have brought the toy with him to school and voluntarily turned it in, after finding he’d accidentally left it in his jacket pocket.
Instead of using their common sense, officials at Fredrick Funston Elementary School in Chicago freaked out and subjected him to interrogation and intimidation tactics, threats and accusations of lying, according to a report by The Rutherford Institute, a rights group whose attorneys have taken up the case.
“According to Caden’s mother, Ms. Fraustro, Caden was waiting in line to be patted down on Friday, January 31st, when he realized that he had mistakenly left in his sweater pocket a toy plastic gun which he had played with the previous night…” a letter from Rutherford Institute President John Whitehead to the Director of Chicago Public Schools reads. “Caden alerted the security personnel to his predicament.”
The fact that the school is patting down 11 year old children is shocking in itself and highlights how the “security” enhancements seen in airports and at transport hubs have made their way into every day American life. Perhaps school officials are simply emulating the TSA, which is now engaged in confiscating miniature toy guns from ‘Toy Story’ Woody dolls.
The further fact that school officials in Caden’s case did not even alert the boy’s parents before questioning him in such an aggressive manner is equally as disturbing. The Rutherford report also indicates that when the boy’s mother was finally called in, she was berated and accused of being a bad parent for allowing her son to play with toy guns, whether it be in or out of school.
The boy’s punishment was a one day suspension, which will remain on his permanent record, as well as a demand to undergo counseling and psychiatric evaluation before returning to school.
The boy, who is now said to be suffering from distressing nightmares over the incident, may not even return to the school, or any school for that matter, given that his mother immediately removed both of her children from the District in order to homeschool them.
“This case speaks volumes about what’s wrong with our public schools and public officials: rather than school officials showing they are capable of exercising good judgment, distinguishing between what is and is not a true threat, and preserving safety while steering clear of a lockdown mind set better suited to a prison environment, they instead opted to exhibit poor judgment, embrace heavy handed tactics, and treat a toy gun like a dangerous weapon,” said Rutherford’s Whitehead.
“School officials sent a strong, chilling message to this child and his classmates that they have no rights in the American police state.” he added.
The Rutherford Institute is seeking a lifting of the suspension, as well as all references to the incident being struck from Caden’s permanent school record.
As we have thoroughly documented, there is now a plethora od cases of overreactions in schools to anything remotely considered gun-like.
Other similar idiotic cases include the infamous Hello Kitty bubble gun ‘terroristic’ incident, the miniature lego gun school bus massacre, the plastic toy soldier, holding a gun on a cup cake catastophe, and the perilous pencil pointing ‘pow powers’ of Virginia.
Even food bitten into the shape of a gun has been cracked down upon with suspensions.
In many of the cases, children as young as four or five years old were interrogated, or even arrested with potentially permanent criminal record reprecussions.
The list of previous incidents of this nature is now so long that it has prompted lawmakers to take action.
The latest to do so are Florida representatives who have introduced legislation that says “simulating a firearm” is not grounds for disciplinary action. The bill, which cleared its first legislative hurdle last week, lists “brandishing a partially consumed pastry or other food item” as something that should not land students in hot water.
This article was posted: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 at 1:27 pm
Tags: education, police state
Eric Holder: “We need to brainwash people” - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sa49iocFTSE - 127k - Cached - Similar pages
Mar 18, 2012 … Eric Holder says we need to brainwash people into submitting to gun control. I
MSNBC Host Melissa Harris-Perry » All Your Kids Belong To Us …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3qtpdSQox0 - 135k - Cached - Similar pages
Apr 4, 2013…
Wall Street surges as Yellen keeps Fed policy intact; Dow up 200
Party like it is 1999 because it is.
Or 1929, that works too.
Happiness is getting a telemarketer call gleefully announcing I can lower my interest rate to 6.9% - when I have zero debt and no depreciating crap shack! All I had to do was hit the red button on my Galaxy S4 to hang up and laugh!
Got that, Amy the Hoaxster?
Happiness is my Toyota running smooth and at the end of next Month (March) it will be the end of eleven years of having my car. I’m going to keep it as long as possible.
With all the money I have left over by renting and not buying new I am raking in the dough on my investments. Realizing gains on stocks I would have not otherwise bought. Invested some in GDX and GDXJ and am riding the precious metals wave.
Got that, Amy the Hoaxster?
A paid off car will never feel like a real car.
Living in a rental will never feel like suffocating underwater.
Good on ya, Bill! Lil’ Blue and I celebrate 20 years together this year! BTW Lil’ Blue is a 1994 Honda Civic.
+1
19 Statistics About The Drugging Of America That Are Almost Too Crazy To Believe
Michael Snyder
American Dream
February 11, 2014
The American people are the most drugged people in the history of the planet. Illegal drugs get most of the headlines, but the truth is that the number of Americans that are addicted to legal drugs is far greater than the number of Americans that are addicted to illegal drugs.
As you will see below, close to 70 percent of all Americans are currently on at least one prescription drug. In addition, there are 60 million Americans that “abuse alcohol” and 22 million Americans that use illegal drugs. What that means is that almost everyone that you meet is going to be on something. That sounds absolutely crazy but it is true. We are literally being drugged out of our minds.
In fact, as you will read about below, there are 70 million Americans that are taking “mind-altering drugs” right now. If it seems like most people cannot think clearly these days, it is because they can’t. We love our legal drugs and it is getting worse with each passing year. And considering the fact that big corporations are making tens of billions of dollars peddling their drugs to the rest of us, don’t expect things to change any time soon. The following are 19 statistics about the drugging of America that are almost too crazy to believe…
#1 An astounding 70 million Americans are taking legal mind-altering drugs right now.
#2 According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, doctors wrote more than 250 million prescriptions for antidepressants during 2010.
#3 According to a study conducted by the Mayo Clinic, nearly 70 percent of all Americans are on at least one prescription drug. An astounding 20 percent of all Americans are on at least five prescription drugs.
#4 Americans spent more than 280 billion dollars on prescription drugs during 2013.
#5 According to the CDC, approximately 9 out of every 10 Americans that are at least 60 years old say that they have taken at least one prescription drug within the last month.
#6 There are 60 million Americans that “abuse alcohol”.
#7 According to the Department of Health and Human Services, 22 million Americans use illegal drugs.
#8 Incredibly, more than 11 percent of all Americans that are 12 years of age or older admit that they have driven home under the influence of alcohol at least once during the past year.
#9 According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there is an unintentional drug overdose death in the United States every 19 minutes.
#10 In the United States today, prescription painkillers kill more Americans than heroin and cocaine combined.
#11 According to the CDC, approximately three quarters of a million people a year are rushed to emergency rooms in the United States because of adverse reactions to pharmaceutical drugs.
#12 According to Alternet, “11 of the 12 new-to-market drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration were priced above $100,000 per-patient per-year” in 2012.
#13 The percentage of women taking antidepressants in America is higher than in any other country in the world.
#14 Many of these antidepressants contain warnings that “suicidal thoughts” are one of the side effects that should be expected. The suicide rate for Americans between the ages of 35 and 64 rose by close to 30 percent between 1999 and 2010. The number of Americans that are killed by suicide now exceeds the number of Americans that die as a result of car accidents every year.
#15 In 2010, the average teen in the United States was taking 1.2 central nervous system drugs. Those are the kinds of drugs which treat conditions such as ADHD and depression.
#16 Children in the United States are three times more likely to be prescribed antidepressants as children in Europe are.
#17 A shocking Government Accountability Office report discovered that approximately one-third of all foster children in the United States are on at least one psychiatric drug.
#18 A survey conducted for the National Institute on Drug Abuse found that more than 15 percent of all U.S. high school seniors abuse prescription drugs.
#19 It turns out that dealing drugs is extremely profitable. The 11 largest pharmaceutical companies combined to rake in approximately $85,000,000,000 in profits in 2012.
In America today, doctors are trained that there are just two potential solutions to any problem. Either you prescribe a pill or you cut someone open. Surgery and drugs are pretty much the only alternatives they offer us.
And an endless barrage of television commercials have trained all of us to think that there is a “pill for every problem”.
Are you in pain?
Just take a pill.
Are you feeling blue?
Just take a pill.
Do you need a spark in your marriage?
Just take a pill.
And most Americans assume that all of these pills are perfectly safe.
After all, the government would never approve something that wasn’t safe, right?
Sadly, what most Americans don’t realize is that there is a revolving door between big pharmaceutical corporations and the government agencies that supposedly “regulate” them. Many of those that are now in charge of our “safety” have spent their entire careers peddling legal drugs to all of us.
We have become a nation of drugged out zombies, and it is all perfectly legal. The funny thing is that many of these “legal drugs” have just slightly different formulations from their “illegal” counterparts.
If more Americans understood what they were actually taking, would that cause them to stop?
Perhaps some would, but for the most part Americans are totally in love with their drugs and giving them up would not be easy.
Just ask anyone that has tried.
So what do you think about the drugging of America?
Please feel free to share what you think by posting a comment below…
This article was posted: Tuesday, February 11, 2014 at 6:13 am
Tags: pharmaceutical
We have become a nation of drugged out zombies, and it is all perfectly legal.
You know it is one of the reasons that I avoid shopping in stores during busy hours. I am so tired of people pushing their shopping carts at zombie speed and stopping in the middle of the aisle blocking traffic. Admittedly I like to walk fast but so people act like their in a trance it does bother me. I am in a store to shop and get out not to watch an episode of the Walking Dead.
so=so many
So?
And this is from 1965!
“Mother’s Little Helper” (Rolling Stones)
What a drag it is getting old
“Kids are different today,”
I hear ev’ry mother say
Mother needs something today to calm her down
And though she’s not really ill
There’s a little yellow pill
She goes running for the shelter of a mother’s little helper
And it helps her on her way, gets her through her busy day
“Things are different today,”
I hear ev’ry mother say
Cooking fresh food for a husband’s just a drag
So she buys an instant cake and she burns her frozen steak
And goes running for the shelter of a mother’s little helper
And two help her on her way, get her through her busy day
Doctor please, some more of these
Outside the door, she took four more
What a drag it is getting old
“Men just aren’t the same today”
I hear ev’ry mother say
They just don’t appreciate that you get tired
They’re so hard to satisfy, You can tranquilize your mind
So go running for the shelter of a mother’s little helper
And four help you through the night, help to minimize your plight
Doctor please, some more of these
Outside the door, she took four more
What a drag it is getting old
“Life’s just much too hard today,”
I hear ev’ry mother say
The pusuit of happiness just seems a bore
And if you take more of those, you will get an overdose
No more running for the shelter of a mother’s little helper
They just helped you on your way, through your busy dying day
I’m going to do my best to help keep T-bill yields low in a few days as I move some of my stock sales into bills.
Precious metals and T-bills - they rock!