March 19, 2014

Bits Bucket for March 19, 2014

Post off-topic ideas, links, and Craigslist finds here.




RSS feed

235 Comments »

Comment by Carl Morris
2014-03-19 02:07:37

Leaving China in the morning. Hopefully my plane doesn’t disappear. Been a little more of a grind this time, but familiarity breed contempt I suppose. In the end I think what I’m most impressed by is the subway system. That thing works.

Comment by JingleMale
2014-03-19 02:38:43

Good luck and God’s speed on your travels.

 
Comment by Whac-A-Bubble™
2014-03-19 05:13:18

“Hopefully my plane doesn’t disappear.”

You are understandably worried, but hopefully there is no actual reason to worry.

Comment by Carl Morris
2014-03-19 05:57:59

Not really worried…

Comment by Whac-A-Bubble™
2014-03-19 06:24:42

Good. I was thinking about the psychological concept of the “representativeness heuristic” and whether it applies to recent plane crashes. I believe it might.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by rms
2014-03-19 07:22:18

“Hopefully my plane doesn’t disappear.”

+1 Looks like re-runs of the Kim Jong-il funeral. Doesn’t the Malaysian religious franchise have a heaven?

 
 
Comment by joe
2014-03-19 06:06:42

Subways are the best form of transit for a number of reasons. They’re less expensive and time-consuming to build in China, I’m sure. In US cities it takes forever because of rights of way, political favors, and the slowly grinding gears of the democratic process. In China, I assume it’s much more straightforward.

Subways are yet another reason NYC >>>> DC.

Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 06:15:17

Liberace!

 
 
Comment by LolaLOL
2014-03-19 06:30:38

How long is this going to go on? Is this your life now, constant trips to China? Are you cool with that?

Comment by joe
2014-03-19 06:38:42

If he could work it out so he could spend a few days in Pataya on his way home each time, it would actually be pretty sweet. YNY.

 
Comment by Carl Morris
2014-03-19 06:46:13

How long is this going to go on? Is this your life now, constant trips to China? Are you cool with that?

I don’t think so. But it is possible this will go on for a lot of this year. I think I’m OK with it as long as I get some input on when I can go and when I can’t.

Comment by Bill, just south of Irvine
2014-03-19 16:33:48

Bring me back a beautiful Chinese woman on your next trip out

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Dolly Llama
2014-03-19 07:19:35

Hopefully my plane doesn’t disappear

Just ask the pilot if he has a flight simulator at home.

 
 
Comment by mathguy
2014-03-19 02:12:00

Rio,

Yesterday you wanted to coninue about the greatness of Brazil and posted this:

You think Brazil’s median income is “too low” but look up “median” - half make more, half make less.

Uhh yeah I get it, that’s why I used median and not mean… to show what a middle of the road person in Brazil might expect. And the result is less than $4000 per year. They you touted that no one owns a car.. yeah, they can’t afford it. Then you suggested that its all getting better, so Brazil is a better place, for instance:

> and an extra month’s pay at the end of the year.

Yeah, if I was paying someone less than $300 bucks a month I might throw an extra couple hundred at them at them around Christmas to tide my guilt over.

Lets look at some key phrases about Brazil from wikipedia:

Brazil continues to have high crime rates in a number of statistics, despite recent improvements. More than 500,000 people have been killed by firearms in Brazil between 1979 and 2003

Lawsuits on appeal may take several years to resolve, and in some cases more than a decade elapses before definitive rulings

The Brazilian military has also three times intervened militarily to overthrow the Brazilian government.[187]

Brazil received an International Monetary Fund rescue package in mid-2002 of $30.4 billion,[208] then a record sum.

more money is spent abroad by Brazilian than receipts from international tourists visiting Brazil.

Corruption costs Brazil almost $41 billion a year alone, with 69.9% of the country’s firms identifying the issue as a major constraint in successfully penetrating the global market.

Local government corruption is so prevalent that voters only perceive it as a problem if it surpasses certain levels, and only if a local media e.g. a radio station is present to divulge the findings of corruption charges.

The purchasing power in Brazil is eroded by the so-called Brazil cost.

The Brazilian public health system, the National Health System (SUS), is managed and provided by all levels of government.[257] The public health services are universal and available to all citizens of the country for free. Nevertheless millions of affluent Brazilians have private health care coverage.

Childhood mortality: about 2.51% of childhood mortality, reaching 3.77% in the northeast region.

Mortality caused by external causes (transportation, violence and suicide): 71.7 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants (14.9% of all deaths in the country), reaching 82.3 deaths in the southeast region.

So obviously I’m cherry picking all the bad bits from wikipedia, but really, you think we should emulate a country where the corruption is so bad there is a term for the bribes it takes to do business there - the “brazil cost” ? This is a country whose corruption continues to keep the general population suppressed, even as you claim it is improving.

It’s like I said yesterday, if the Nazi’s gave their labor camp workers a day of rest in Aushwitz, should you tell the Jews not to worry because its getting better? Admit that a spade is a spade. You’re a relatively rich American living in a third world country and telling us how great it is.. yeah for you… maybe not so much for the guy out on a rural farm…

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2014-03-19 05:51:09

So obviously I’m cherry picking all the bad bits from wikipedia,”

LOL. I’m so impressed with your wiki knowledge of Brazil. Thanks for telling me about Brazil where I live, have visited since 1988 and have done business with for over two decades. You don’t think I know all those things and more? Anyone can cherry pick a bunch of bad things from any country. Want me to compile a sh!t-list on the USA?

you think we should emulate a country where the corruption is so bad

You infer I think USA should emulate corruption? Are you a willful idiot?

I said the USA should emulate Brazil only in the way that USA’s public policies should be geared to support and help the poor and the middle-class instead of most of USA’s public policy being geared to help only the rich. As in policies to lessen the wealth gap, not increase it. Brazil did this. USA did not. Get it? Or is this to complex of a concept for a “math” guy computer dude who does nbot seem to be able to differentiate the good things about a country from the bad?

In spite of all the bad stuff about Brazil - and I can come up with a much bigger list than your wiki stuff - Brazil’s public policies over the past 20 years have brought 35-40 million people out of poverty, legitimized their currency and have benefited the majority of the population.

Now that’s the bottom line when it comes to income inequality which is my main point about Brazil’s vast improvement. To complicated?

Comment by X-GSfixr
2014-03-19 08:43:54

“Corruption costs Brazil almost $41 billion a year…….”

Cheapskates. They can’t be considered First World until the cost of their corruption equals that of the US of A.

“We’re #1 !!!”

 
Comment by mathguy
2014-03-19 12:03:08

>You infer I think USA should emulate corruption? Are you a willful idiot?

Are you a willful idiot? Do you not get that the only reason this corruption exists is because the corrupt persons have the laws and policies (and police force) to enforce their corruption?

What you are proposing is that we put more and more power in the hands of government. Worse, you propose we do it all at the federal level, where the average citizen has the least influence. It is shown time and again that power corrupts. This is the whole reason the US constitution was founded on the concept of all rights not explicitly given to the government are retained by the people and the states. The biggest success of the United States has been the limitation of interference by government preventing exactly the type of corruption that is endemic to Brazil. So you must be a willful idiot to turn explicitly shove your head .. somewhere.. and ignore that corruption is exactly why we should not implement government control that you are so fond of touting.

 
 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2014-03-19 05:58:09

You’re a relatively rich American living in a third world country and telling us how great it is.. yeah for you… maybe not so much for the guy out on a rural farm…

I do not think Brazil is a “great” country. However, I know that unlike America, Brazil has made a great effort to help the majority of its people the past 20 years.

I think the USA should emulate Brazil by implementing public policies that are in the interests of the majority of our USA population. What’s so hard about this concept?

Bottom line: For the past 20 years Brazil has implemented major public policies geared to help most it’s people, while the USA has not.

Bottom line: Brazil’s wealth inequality has gotten better the past 20 years, the USA’s has gotten worse.

Are we clear?

Comment by rms
2014-03-19 07:25:58

“Are we clear?”

Crystal.

 
Comment by Rental Watch
2014-03-19 09:07:03

Hasn’t wealth inequality gotten better in pretty much all third world countries over the past 20 years?

My understanding is that this is mainly because of globalization, and one of the fundamental reasons that wealth inequality in the US has gotten worse.

We’re all connected.

Comment by Rental Watch
2014-03-19 12:28:53

And to be clear, my implication is that perhaps the globalization of the economy is having more to do with the equality/inequality question than anything that any government policies can do (absent restrictions that slow/reverse globalization).

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 12:36:13

That’s right, Rental Watch. The way to improve conditions for people in the first world is to outlaw the first-world use of third-world slaves. In other words, reinstate the system of tariffs that worked swimmingly for a couple hundred years in the United States (i.e., America).

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by mathguy
2014-03-19 11:16:18

Yeah let’s be clear. You are advocating for policies that are generating a median income of less than $4000. The truth hurts, so I get why you’re so upset. The math is simple, but I’m not the one who seems to be struggling with it.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 15:26:41

Great post Mathguy. It shows what I always believe that if you really understand something you can condense it. If you have to bloviate on the same point, you do not understand it, you are just trying to baffle people with your B.S.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by ibbots
2014-03-19 06:13:24

Fail - Godwins law infraction.

Comment by mathguy
2014-03-19 12:06:23

False. In no way was I implying that the target had Naziish qualities or that their policies would lead to death camps. The point was simply to show that a slight improvement in bad treatment does not merit praise for the perpetrator.

How about I use puppy kicking as an example instead? Should you praise a man because he went from kicking a puppy 10 times a day to 9 times per day?

 
 
Comment by LolaLOL
2014-03-19 06:40:11

When you get into a wrestling match with a pig, you get dirty and the pig gets happy.

Lola is a high net worth individual who lives in a Brazilian beachfront mansion with a hot wife and not a care in the world. He still likes to keep an eye on the American housing bubble though, by posting random articles from leftist talking points and catfishing those who will engage him.

She’d be happy to stop by a webcam if you can work out an arrangement.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 06:52:48

She’d be happy to stop by a webcam if you can work out an arrangement

Sorry. I am not going to pay some tranny website to see Lola on a webcam. Of course, it is more likely that you will catch “her” when c-spam scans the Congressional hearing audience, she is probably some congressional aide to a “sh*tlib.

 
Comment by measton
2014-03-19 08:31:23

It always makes me laugh the some consider calling someone a woman or gay the ultimate insult. You must have wonderful relationships.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 08:44:00

It makes me laugh how much it bothers Lola despite his “liberal” claims. It is even funnier that he has resorted to making the same claims about me.

BTW, actually, my relationships are just fine and any time I am having a problem with a woman in a relationship and word gets out, I have several women calling me up asking for dates. Granted it may just be a sad reflection on the available men out there and how low, thankfully, other men have set the bar, but it works for me.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2014-03-19 08:48:34

It makes me laugh how much it bothers Lola despite his “liberal” claims

I laugh, it makes you look like the bigot you are. It shows that you’re scared - that your Koch boss is scared. I said you worked for Koch years ago, now you copy me.

Heck, even another wingnut has “Lola” in his screename. Why?

Because I’m scary and my words are powerful I guess.

 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 09:08:09

Because I’m scary and my words are powerful I guess.

Your posts are not scary they are devoid of evidence that you can do little more than post some other liberals thoughts. When you deviate from that it is comical. Now seeing you in a dress probably would be quite scary.

 
 
 
Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 12:38:53

He doesn’t have a wife. He extolls the use of prostitution, and also excuses male infidelity.

 
 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 06:57:35

Great post. It is not only that Brazil is poor, it is that it is has been for a number of years growing even slower than India. The earlier economic growth was been based on an explosion in consumer debt and the export of raw commodities. Thus, while Lola is trying to hold it up as an example to follow, we do not need any lessons in increasing consumer debt, and exporting commodities without value added is not a good strategy.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 07:05:55

Excerpt from an article that will post above:

Economists have been sounding the alarm on Brazilian consumer debt. The country’s household debt as a percentage of disposable income reached a record high of 44.8 percent in June, according to Moody’s ratings agency.

That was more than double where it stood in June 2005, when the figure was 20.06 percent.

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2014-03-19 07:58:42

Economists have been sounding the alarm on Brazilian

Forget about Brazil. They’ve improved their wealth inequality. Let’s talk about USA. Let’s talk about how 34 years of trickle down destroyed our country. USA: Wealth inequality off the charts.

34 years of Reagan’s trickle down philosophy failed America. Americans are waking up to that fact. That’s why your Koch boss is scared and has you blabbering bs on the internet.

It’s not working.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2014-03-19 07:07:13

It is not only that Brazil is poor, it is that it is has been for a number of years growing even slower than India.

You’re just mad that none of the BRIC’s share the wealth as Brazil has done. Brazil likes to spread the wealth around and that pisses you off. Guess what? It still is. “Power to the People”! It’s funny and real!

“Twenty years ago Brazil’s GDP was at $358 billion and ranked 11th in the world; today, at $2.5 trillion, it’s between sixth and eighth, depending on who’s counting. No other BRIC balances democracy and widespread wealth nearly as well.” Forbes Aug 2012

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 08:23:07

No other BRIC balances democracy and widespread wealth nearly as well.” Forbes Aug 2012

The Brazilian economy has been in the crapper every since the article came out, so the opinion has been disproved. If you adopt policies that kill growth in a poor country you are not balancing your policies well. Also, we have had the riots in Brazil since then which also show that the balance has not been achieved well.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2014-03-19 08:34:12

The Brazilian economy has been in the crapper every since the article came out

Why do you lie? Why do you LIE? Koch tells you to? Unemployment has fallen and wages are up since that article.

Brazil’s Unemployment Rate Ends 2013 at Record Low 4.3% - WSJ …
online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20140130-703958.html‎
Jan 30, 2014 - Brazil’s Unemployment Rate Ends 2013 at Record Low 4.3%. Article … unemployment in 2013 also fell to a record low 5.4% from 5.5% in 2012.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2014-03-19 08:41:42

had the riots in Brazil since then which also show that the balance has not been achieved well

lol….Dang This is another example of Adan not getting the big picture on anything. The riots were because millions of the people got a taste of middle class and want more from their corrupt government. Got IQ Adan or does Koch stifle it?

Special Report: Why Brazil’s new middle class is seething

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/03/us-brazil-middle-specialreport-idUSBRE9620DT20130703

The demonstrations took off, though, when Brazil’s “new” middle class joined the fray. “This is the discontent of people for whom having enough rice and beans on the table no longer comes as a surprise,”

SÃO GONÇALO, Brazil (Reuters) - André Tamandaré isn’t supposed to be so angry.

Over the past decade, the 33-year-old high-school dropout has moved into his own house, got a steady job and earned enough income with his longtime girlfriend, Rosimeire de Souza, to lead their two kids into Brazil’s fast-rising middle class.

Now a public health worker in a sprawling suburb east of Rio de Janeiro, Tamandaré is the kind of citizen that Brazil’s government thought was fulfilled. Instead, he is one of the more than one million people across Latin America’s biggest country who have hit the streets in a wave of mass protests.

 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 08:57:31

From a Feb 20, 2014 Forbes article, as far as the unemployment, it appears that they are getting help from the Obama administration on calculating unemployment:

Brazil might be heading for a recession, according to the emerging markets Americas research team at Nomura Securities in New York.

Tony Volpon, a managing director at Nomura, said in a note Thursday that thanks to increasing interest rates in 2013, the economic growth in the first half of 2014 should disappoint Brazilian investors. He lowered his GDP forecast target to 1.3% from 1.5% and expects the Central Bank to stop the hiking cycle this month, pushing interest rates to 10.75%.

As it is, third quarter GDP fell more than the market expected. Brazil’s economy contracted by 0.5% while market consensus still had it weak, at -0.3%. Volpon and his team warned of back-to-back negative quarters. They were at it again this morning in a client note.

“The pessimistic view is largely based on our in-house financial conditions index and our forecasting work based on the FCI,” Volpon explained. “Financial conditions tightened…and we believe the bulk of the impact would then manifest itself in the fourth quarter.”

 
Comment by Al
2014-03-19 09:40:24

It appears Brazil gains jobs during slow growth while the US loses them during the ‘recovery’. Interesting.

 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 09:50:41

Slow growth, it is a recession. It would be very interesting just how Brazil does calculate unemployment. I doubt that they are really adding many jobs.

 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 09:59:50

They have indeed adopted our policy as defining unemployed as actively looking for a job, like Obama you have a stable or declining work force under the definition by declining unemployment most months. O’ how the progressives like to play their games to hide their economic failures:

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/brazil/unemployment-rate

 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 10:05:00

This is the most amazing part of the link that is about to post, 11.8 million having a real private sector job out of population over 200 million?

The number of workers with a formal contract in the private sector remained steady at 11.8 million and average real wages at R$ 1979.14 showed no change over December.

 
 
Comment by Jane
2014-03-20 02:37:55

Adan, it cannot be disputed that “trickle down” is a fraudulent construct. Really.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 07:14:59

Throw the government debt in with the consumer debt and you will see where this is going. China may be slowing and may face a future debt problem but Brazil has already hit the wall and it is stalling with a per capita income a small fraction of Mississippi.

http://www.rediff.com/business/report/govt-debt-ratio-highest-for-india-brazil/20121031.htm

 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 07:24:51

This below will also appear as a link. When we point out how poor Brazil is, Rio/Lola squeals that it is not fair to compare it to the U.S., it needs to be judge like an emerging market. Fine. But when you compare it to other emerging markets it has slower growth and higher debts. So whether you compare it on an absolute or relative basis it comes up wanting. Brazil’s socialist policies which are relatively new have stopped economic growth in its tracks which makes it like Argentina and Chavez land. Redistributing OPM has stopped the pie from growing so people are still trapped in poverty. Just remember in the early 1900’s many immigrants came to Argentina over America because they thought it had the brighter future. The left of center policies adopted by Argentina prevented that from happening. Not that Argentina would have ever had a bigger economy than the U.S., but it did have the possibility of being wealthier per capita.

Link: India and Brazil have the highest government debt ratios at almost 70 per cent of the gross domestic product among top 10 emerging market economies, a report by Deutsche Bank has said.

According to the report, the average government debt levels of the top 10 emerging market economies, including China, Russia and Indonesia, has halved to 25 per cent, from 50 per cent of GDP since 2000.

“However, Brazil and India are the two countries with the highest government debt ratios at almost 70 per cent of GDP, which is however, still lower than the developed countries’ average,” the report said.

Since 2000, the debt metrics of top 10 emerging market economies have improved very tangibly, while on the other hand debt levels of developed economies (G-7) increased to more than 110 per cent from less than 80 per cent.

“The EM-10 stand in marked contrast to the G-7, where government debt is currently projected to peak at almost six times the level of the EM-10 around the middle of the present decade,” the report said.

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2014-03-19 07:47:32

When we point out how poor Brazil is,

Brazil poor? Of course by USA standards. Way poor. But…….

Brazil: 40 million out of poverty the past 20 years. More or less energy independent. 100% of it’s people have health care. Wealth inequality greatly improving.

USA: Gone to seed except for the 1% after 34 years of Reagans trickle down economics. (That’s why Adan has his panties in a bind) lol

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 07:59:29

The globalists, not Reagan, have hurt the U.S. but it could recover with his supply side policies. Brazil will survive as long as its raw resources last and then it will collapse like Zimbabwe.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2014-03-19 08:11:08

Brazil will survive as long as its raw resources last and then it will collapse like Zimbabwe

Reagan was a globalist and Reagan’s all for the rich philosophy killed America. And American’s are talking about it now. Bigtime. Yes.

I’m worried about Brazil? Why? Brazil has an Apple Store dude. Deal with it.

 
Comment by measton
2014-03-19 08:37:59

You can’t just look at average salary.
If they have universal health care but the average US family pays 12k a year in insurance and another 2k in deductibles. Then pays higher taxes and fees for gov services and education. The median family in Brazil is probably doing a lot better than the numbers indicate.

The trend is what’s important too. We all know how the middle and upper middle class has been doing in the US over the last couple of decades.

I wonder if when they look at crime figures they include the FEDS bailout of our elite corrupt banking sector.

 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 08:46:48

If they have universal health care but the average US family pays 12k a year in insurance and another 2k in deductibles.

They are importing Cuban “doctors ” which are little more than medics because the quality of care is so low for most Brazilians. This hardly suggests they are getting equivalent care to Americans.

 
 
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 07:48:35

Brazil? Poor? That’s an understatement.

This is how the average(majority) of residents live in RioDeJaniero.

http://a57.foxnews.com/global.fncstatic.com/static/managed/img/fn2/feeds/Associated%20Press/2013/01/13/0/0/38d2dfc6580f5301260f6a7067009c23.jpg

What. A. Hole.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 02:46:50

Housing depreciates, always.

Comment by joe
2014-03-19 06:10:34

^^ this

Comment by Jingle Male
2014-03-19 07:32:11

HA HA HA +1 Joe you made me laugh this morning.

 
 
Comment by rms
2014-03-19 07:32:28

Housing depreciates, always.

+1 Ditto. Doesn’t matter if I party or work-out; I keep getting older.

Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 07:38:49

That’s right.

 
Comment by Jingle Male
2014-03-19 12:03:36

And your peak economic power years are 45-55. It’s all downhill afterward!

 
 
 
Comment by Blackhawk
2014-03-19 03:46:32

America’s Internet Surrender

“In the past few years, Russia and China have used a U.N. agency called the International Telecommunication Union to challenge the open Internet. They have lobbied for the ITU to replace Washington as the Icann overseer. They want the ITU to outlaw anonymity on the Web (to make identifying dissidents easier) and to add a fee charged to providers when people gain access to the Web “internationally”—in effect, a tax on U.S.-based sites such as Google GOOG +1.61% and Facebook. FB +0.65% The unspoken aim is to discourage global Internet companies from giving everyone equal access.”

Http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303563304579447362610955656

I find it strange that we would just walk away. The Government clearly wants to control everything yet they give this away. What’s up with that?

Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 04:57:22

Housing Blackawk housing.

 
Comment by Whac-A-Bubble™
2014-03-19 05:14:41

One oligarch controlling the internet is as good as another?

 
Comment by Big Brother
2014-03-19 06:40:43

I can control both by restricting and I can control by monitoring.

What I choose to not restrict I may instead choose to monitor.

Either way, I get control.

 
Comment by AbsoluteBeginner
2014-03-19 07:12:32

” ‘The unspoken aim is to discourage global Internet companies from giving everyone equal access.” ”

Could there be an Internet 2.0 or maybe a Supernet 1.0 in the years to come that over-ride the current internet’s controls? Maybe a more private one but still accessible to anyone who wants to get around government ISP bans?

Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 12:28:53

tor

 
 
 
Comment by frankie
2014-03-19 04:55:01

Anatoliy Hrytsenko, a former Ukrainian defence minister, accused the UK and the United States of failing to meet the agreement struck in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum to uphold the territorial integrity of the state in return for it giving up nuclear weapons.

He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that Mr Putin is “behaving like Hitler” and must be “isolated any way possible”.

Asked if the UK and US had broken the deal, he replied : “I would say so because if we still had our nuclear potential, at least technical nuclear weapons, never ever we would see Russian troops or any other Russian threat in Crimea.”

http://www.standard.co.uk/panewsfeeds/fears-grow-as-crimea-clashes-kill-2-9200854.html

Put not your trust in international law.

Stop quoting laws to us. We carry swords.
– Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus

Comment by Dolly Llama
2014-03-19 07:25:48

Anatoliy Hrytsenko, a former Ukrainian defence minister, accused the UK and the United States of failing to meet the agreement struck in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum

You should have known better Mr Hrystenko. UK and US are at best your flakey friends. On top of that, they will do anything to preserve the banking sector.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 08:48:32

But he was assured by the Obama administration “if you want your Crimea, you can keep your Crimea”.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 09:41:35
(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 11:50:25

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/clinton-stakes-out-hawkish-stance-on-ukraine-2014-03-19?link=MW_story_popular

Interesting, if you know whether someone is a globalist or not, you know their position on Crimea.

 
 
 
 
Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 12:26:25

Didn’t ppl in Crimea vote to take off?

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 12:40:19

Yes, but the Clintons bombed Serbia when it would not allow Kosovo to break away but they are angry with Russia for allowing a vote in Crimea for the inhabitants to determine their own destiny. Believe me the inconsistency of the U.S. position is not lost on the Russians and is the reason why Putin’s popularity is soaring.

 
 
Comment by Jane
2014-03-20 02:33:18

Frankie,

I would like to have the source book or reference. That quotation makes my day, so to speak.

The man was true to himself.

We have politicized authenticity away. It’s only allowed to peek out from a few chinks here and there.

If you have a book that contains the quotation, I’d like to know the title so I can order it.

Thanks!

 
 
Comment by frankie
2014-03-19 04:56:35

In Inner Mongolia a new city stands largely empty. This city, Ordos, suggests that the great Chinese building boom, which did so much to fuel the country’s astonishing economic growth, is over. Is a bubble about to burst?

A huge statue of the mighty warrior Genghis Khan presides over Genghis Khan Plaza in Ordos New Town. The square is vast, fading into the snowy mist on a recent Sunday morning.

Genghis Khan Plaza is flanked by huge and imposing buildings.

Two giant horses from the steppes rise on their hind legs in the centre of the Plaza, statues which dwarf the great Khan himself.

Only one element is missing from this vast ensemble - people.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17390729

Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 11:55:38

I think that article was posted a couple weeks ago on this board. It was hilarious.

 
 
Comment by frankie
2014-03-19 05:57:42

Does Arizona Slim still post, rather miss her input.

Comment by AmazingRuss
2014-03-19 15:17:29

Nobody left here but the shrieking tree monkeys

 
 
Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 06:01:21

linked from the washington post - how much does $1 million buy you in every major u.s. city?

san francisco - 1502 square feet
boston - 2092
washington - 2198
new york - 2358
los angeles -2375
san diego - 2899
seattle - 3472
denver - 5025
austin - 5128
miami - 5291

http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2014/03/17/real_estate_market_how_much_does_1_million_buy_you_in_every_major_u_s_city.html

 
Comment by joe
2014-03-19 06:04:03

@goon, another story for the “das racis” dossier.

FDNY hit with $98 M judgment in favor of black firefighter applicants.

DiBlasio’s New York… just like Obama’s America.

story below:

———————

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-new-york-fire-department-racial-discrimination-lawsuit-settlement-20140318,0,7743925.story#axzz2wLjCv3Hd

Black and Latino applicants to the New York City fire department who alleged that they lost out on jobs because of racially discriminatory written exams settled a long-running lawsuit for $98 million in back pay, the U.S. Justice Department said Tuesday.

The consent decree, which still requires court approval, calls for a court-appointed monitor to oversee the fire department’s recruiting and hiring process. The department will face specific recruiting goals and must create the positions of diversity advocate in the uniformed force and chief diversity and inclusion officer in the executive ranks.

“This resolution will help ensure that those who seek to serve as firefighters in New York City have an equal opportunity to do so, regardless of their race,” Associate Atty. Gen. Tony West said in a statement.

The agreement stems from a 2007 lawsuit filed by the U.S. government and later joined by the Vulcan Society, a black firefighters group. They argued that the 85-question, pass-fail written exams used since 1999 led to a disproportionate number of black and Latino applicants being excluded from employment eligibility.

The lawsuit noted that only about 3% of the city’s 9,000 firefighters in 2007 were black and 7% were Latino, while New York’s population stood closer to 25% black and 27% Latino.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 08:18:37

The agreement stems from a 2007 lawsuit filed by the U.S. government and later joined by the Vulcan Society, a black firefighters group. They argued that the 85-question, pass-fail written exams used since 1999 led to a disproportionate number of black and Latino applicants being excluded from employment eligibility.

This is known as disparate impact in the law and it is a total crock. You can have a totally fair and objective test and if minorities do not do as well on the test, the test gets thrown out. A meritocracy is not possible in such a world, it is the fast track to idiocracy.

Comment by oxide
2014-03-19 09:47:03

Wasn’t there a Supreme Court case on this, and the black firefighters lost? Does that apply to this case?

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 10:55:02

If you combine a U.S Supreme Court case from 2010 which was a 9-0 decision and the case you were thinking of from 2009 where it actually was white candidates objecting to the throwing out of their tests due the City being worried about being sued under the disparate impact theory, the state of the law is a city is always screwed.

Use a test that blacks do not score was well on without having conclusive proof that it tests things absolutely necessary to the job and you will be sued for violating civil rights. However, if you throw out a test because it appears to have disparate impact on blacks, the white applicants can sue you. Remember IQ tests are banned because blacks do not do as well on them. It does not matter how fair or valid the test is, if blacks do not do as well on it, you will be sued and the burden of proof is on you to show the test is necessary. There is no need to show that there is an intent to discriminate and the fact that you will get smarter people using the test is not a sufficient excuse.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 11:43:46

While this issue seems remote from housing it actually was a major part of the housing bubble. Banks due to a Carter era related law were under immense pressure to make loans to minorities with low credit scores. Subprime loans were initially used to comply with the law, but when banks saw how profitable they could be in a rising housing price market, they became the vehicle of choice for home loans, of course they accelerated the bubble and we all know what happened. But we have learned nothing and banks are being pressured to make more loans to minorities and not to use credit scores since that results in a disparate impact since a higher percentage of minorities have low credit scores.

 
 
 
Comment by joe
2014-03-19 09:53:43

I know this and I am LOLing at it. I took employment law and international employment law as electives in LS. I had a really sh*tlib professor for the former course. The amount of time we spent on disparate impact (as opposed to disparate treatment) was freaking unreal.

Strangely, international emp law prof mostly focused on Europe and it was 180* different than US employment law. Most issues seem to be handled via statutes and works councils (unions) and judges and legal theorists are largely removed from the equation. Seems to be a far superior system.

I think emp law was the worst grade I received in LS, other than Evidence. Evidence was a major sh*tshow that bore no resemblance to federal rules or other day to day lawyering activities. Liberal academics are quite unhinged.

Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 11:54:00

I always get annoyed when a person points to Europe (not a country) or Brazil and says “they are far superior”. Like going without a shower is better, dude.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by joe
2014-03-19 12:28:43

I didn’t say “they are far superior”. I was saying there are some advantages to the European system–in the context of employment discrimination, their system works much better. There is a big divide between common law (UK/US) and the continental euro system. You should look it up sometime. There are advantages and drawbacks to each. In our common law system, judges yield a great deal more power as far as acknowledging or even promoting new theories. And juries are far more common in our system as well (although that was not a factor in the $98M award in this case).

You should also note that I’m not praising the continental system for being liberal, as some here would try to claim.

 
Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 12:49:50

Joe:

You can’t pick out certain disjointed parts of a system, and say that those parts are better. They only work in context of the system itself.

 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 14:43:03

You can’t pick out certain disjointed parts of a system, and say that those parts are better. They only work in context of the system itself.

It is amazing how many people don’t understand that key point. Often times changing one thing works like pulling a thread and can unravel the fabric of a system without people realizing what they have done. Some systems are more sensitive than others. One of the reasons that I believe Obamacare cannot be fixed is because it is a Rube Goldberg design where if one thing does not happen, the next thing will not happen. It is not a design that is sturdy due to redundancy.

 
 
Comment by ibbots
2014-03-19 14:51:59

“Evidence was a major sh*tshow that bore no resemblance to federal rules”

Yes, but was it offered for the truth of the matter asserted?

Seriously though, a lot of schools teach state evidence onaccuza that’s where lawyers are gonna use it, in state court.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by MightyMike
2014-03-19 12:05:52

Aren’t a judgment and settlement two different things?

 
 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2014-03-19 06:04:44

Imagine if the USA would have implemented policies that would have raised the income of the poor and middle-class as Brazil did. Not the same policies of Brazil of course, but USA designed policies fit for the USA economy that would have raised the income of the poor and middle-class. USA’s wealth inequality has gotten worse, Brazil’s better in spite of all the BS in Brazil. It’s simple fact.

Poverty in Brazil decreased by 67,3% between 1994 and 2010, meaning 40 million people were transferred into the middle class…Brazil has also more than tripled its minimum wage since 2002.

What can South Africa learn from Brazil in tackling extreme socioeconomic inequality
? September 13, 2013 ·

Brazil’s progress has been attributed to the successful implementation of various social protection policies that have had a major impact on extreme poverty. Brazil’s experience serves as a potential source of useful policy prescriptions for South Africa in combating extreme socioeconomic inequality. Various multinational forums and organisations have emerged in recent years recognising this exact dynamic. BRICS (Brazil-Russia-India-China-South Africa) and IBSA (India-Brazil- South Africa Dialogue Forum) feature prominently in this regard.

Poverty in Brazil decreased by 67,3% between 1994 and 2010, meaning 40 million people were transferred into the middle class (IPC-IG Report). Over 13,5 million families currently benefit from its acclaimed Bolsa Familia – a Conditional Cash Transfer Social Protection Programme. Brazil has also more than tripled its minimum wage since 2002.

Since the introduction of Bolsa Familia, 95% of Brazilian children attend school more than 85% of the time. These achievements have resulted in Brazil’s Gini Index reducing from 0,597 to 0,538, indicating greater inclusive growth

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 07:01:59

Nothing but a bubble based on consumer debt, Brazil is the last country we want to emulate:

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/brazil/131007/sao-paulo-household-debt-credit-card-brazilian-economy

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2014-03-19 07:11:35

Nothing but a bubble based on consumer debt, Brazil is the last country we want to emulate:

If USA emulated Brazil, USA house prices would probably drop 70%.

Total Mortgage debt as percent of GDP:

Brazil about 6-7%
USA: about 70%

Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 07:57:33

Millions of chicken coops aren’t worth much Lola. I understand they’re one of your business tools but that’s not the point here.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 06:12:22

the lucky ducky future, as described by the atlanta federal reserve, some highlights:

‘on average, it took about 10 months to recover the jobs lost from the seven recessions between 1950 and 1989. but, more than 50 months into the current recovery by the end of last year, the nation was still about a million jobs shy of where it was when the recession started.

37.1 weeks average duration of unemployment in december 2013, as compared with 16.6 weeks in december 2007.

the middle has dropped out from the labor market over the past three decades. jobs that require the most and the least skills eat up a larger share of the market, leaving workers with middle level skills fighting for a smaller and smaller share of jobs. a significant driver of that trend? offshoring of manufacturing and other jobs.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/03/19/the-story-of-the-recession-as-told-through-8-beautiful-atlanta-fed-graphics/

Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 11:47:54

tariffs

 
 
Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 06:15:25

anecdotal, just found out yesterday that my health insurance is going up from $126 a month to $290 a month. this is for individual coverage. my employer has less than 200 employees.

thanks, obama

Comment by jose canusi
2014-03-19 06:23:30

You can also thank everyone who voted for the pig, and thank Chief Justice John Roberts while you’re at it. This is truly a bi-partisan screwing.

 
Comment by Whac-A-Bubble™
2014-03-19 06:28:24

Somebody has to pay for all those formerly uninsured folks who were newly granted coverage.

Comment by Blackhawk
2014-03-19 06:37:44

A vast majority of us are going to be “helping out”

 
 
Comment by real journalists
 
Comment by joe
2014-03-19 06:44:59

Do you think that Medicare/SS are even going to exist for us, broseph?

If they do exist in ~2050, they’ll be shadows of their former selves. And all the while, we’ll have paid for Boomers to Boom. I’ve been saying all along that the benefits will never be means-tests for Boomers but probably will for us. Which means I’ll probably get squat. But rather than be hateful about it, might as well have a laugh about it.

MMM has a good post today, BTW. Check it out.

Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 06:51:32

They’ll probably exist, mostly in name only. Inflation will be so under reported and CPI calculated as such that a monthly SS check will have the purchasing power of about $50, but Uncle Sugar will still report it’s all good.

The 1%, 0.1%, and 0.01% will still be doing just peachy, no question about that.

 
Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 07:48:13

Speaking of MMM, this MarketWatch piece discusses the cost of clown car driving:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/are-you-spending-9000-a-year-on-your-car-2014-03-19

My walk score where I live is 77. But I make up for that with plenty of weekend clown car driving.

 
 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2014-03-19 06:54:55

my health insurance is going up from $126 a month to $290 a month. thanks, obama

There’s more going on there than Obama. Obamacare is often cheaper than employee coverage.

“Across the board, at every level, average exchange premiums are lower than this year’s average premiums for employer-sponsored coverage,”

Obamacare prices may lure employers to exchanges

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/obamacare-prices-may-lure-employers-115659832.html

The phrase “sticker shock” has made headlines in stories about individual Obamacare enrollees, but premium prices for health insurance plans sold on Obamacare exchanges nationally are actually about the same-and in some cases cheaper-than premiums for comparable employer-offered plans, a new analysis reveals.

“There’s been a perception that the plans on the exchanges were not a good deal, that they were either a lot more expensive, or didn’t provide much in the way of coverage,” said Ceci Connolly, managing directly of PwC’s HRI.

Given that, Connolly said, “we were a little bit surprised” when PwC crunched the price data and found “the exchanges are competitive, and even cheaper in some instances.” She also said that PwC clients “have been very intrigued by” the results.

The report found that the median rate of Obamacare exchange-sold plans that offer coverage comparable to employer-offered plans is $5,844 annually.

That’s 4 percent less than the $6,119 for the average cost of an employer-provided plan of comparable benefits coverage, the report found.

Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 07:27:05

“There’s more going on there than Obama”

No, there isn’t. It’s all Obama, all the time.

I am an educated person. Just as educated as the one third of Louisiana Republicans who blame Obama for Hurricane Katrina.

Comment by Ben Jones
2014-03-19 19:26:38

‘Health insurance premiums will likely skyrocket next year, despite the Obama administration’s consistent assurance that consumers will not experience sticker shock under the president’s health care law’

‘That’s according to industry insiders who told The Hill that they are expecting the price of monthly premiums to increase significantly. In some states, rates could increase by as much as 300 percent.’

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/insurers-obamacare-expect-premium-prices-180000930.html

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 06:16:24

Would you so much as buy a used bicycle from one of these clowns?

http://www.ourbroker.com/staff/

Comment by real journalists
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 10:01:07

Bwahahahaa!

Another tattoo to cover up the needle marks! Way to go Realtors!

 
 
Comment by joe
2014-03-19 09:55:22

At least they are honest in some ways:

http://www.ourbroker.com/category/toxic-loans/

Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 10:21:45

Of course they are are Lib. ;)

 
 
 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2014-03-19 06:16:42

“Poverty in Brazil decreased by 67,3% between 1994 and 2010, meaning 40 million people were transferred into the middle class (IPC-IG Report)”

The way USA should emulate Brazil the past 20 years, is in public policy aimed to get a semblance of the type of results above. And maybe a national energy policy to achieve energy independence.

Did the USA implement USA policies that reduced USA poverty 67% since 1994? No but Brazil did.

Did the USA implement USA policies that economically improved the lives of 60 million Americans since 1994? No but Brazil did.

Did the USA implement USA policies that reduced USA wealth inequality since 1994? No but Brazil did.

Did the USA implement USA policies that achieved energy independence since 1975? No but Brazil did.

That’s what I’m talking about when I say we should emulate Brazil - public polices fit for the USA to achieve a semblance of these types of goals that a much more screwed up country than the USA achieved. This is not a hard concept to understand.

Comment by measton
2014-03-19 08:49:47

Poverty leads to a lot of bad things

1. Crime
2. Decreased economic activity due to Crime.
3. Nationalism and Religious extremism and racism as people look for someone to blame for their economic fall, and as politicians and other leaders try to harness that anger to gain power.
4. War - To distract the masses
5. Decline in democracy as elite use levers of power to disenfranchise the masses - See voter ID laws, Gerrymandering, NSA, etc

And yet the feeble minded members of the middle class argue for their own destruction.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 09:23:48

Yes poverty does all those things. So why does Obama want to import poverty by granting amnesty to illegal aliens?

Comment by measton
2014-03-19 12:00:13

I’d say why do the elites and businesses want to flush the country with cheap labor, the answer of course is it makes them wealthy. Even on the GOP side you have people supporting this and work visa’s.

Of course it’s much bigger than this.
Why do we support free trade without putting any labor or environmental requirements on the people we trade with.
Why to we have a tax system that greatly favors the elites over everyone else.
Why do we bail out the elites and drive up prices for everyone else.

Everything is geared toward destroying the middle class in this country and the reason of course is that as the elites gather more wealth they gather more political power.

Now if Brazil is growing it’s middle class then maybe we should consider why and how.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 12:28:53

Go ahead and trade places with the typical brazilian.

You won’t because you know what the truth is.

 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 12:31:10

Now if Brazil is growing it’s middle class then maybe we should consider why and how.

They are not growing the middle class by our standards. Due to globalization there are people willing to pay them 1/10 of our wages and that is better than chopping sugar cane but it teaches us no lessons. Unless you want to do away with the minimum wage, SNAP etc. and pay autoworkers $2.50 an hour, in which case I guarantee that manufacturing jobs will soar in the U.S.

 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 14:02:27

So why does Obama want to import poverty by granting amnesty to illegal aliens?

Measton, you ignored the question the first time around so I am asking you it again. I know that big business wants cheap labor and I have denounced the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on this board numerous times for it, but the question is why does Obama want amnesty despite it being the importation of poverty? Come on now you can tell us.

 
 
 
 
Comment by mathguy
2014-03-19 11:31:32

You want to talk about 1994 to today? Here is more simple math for you:

https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/household/

The lowest quintile of incomes in the US had a top range of 13,426

in 1996. This means more than 80% of households were making over $13,426 (adjusted for inflation even).

In 2012 that number was $20,599 . The gain of $7,000 was more than the entire median salary (almost double actually) of someone in Brazil today.

Again, USA might have problems, but emulating Brazil in any way sure doesn’t sound smart when you are getting this kind of growth with current policies… You can spin statistics to show that someone making $1000 in 1994 and makes $2000 in 2012 had a higher % growth, but I will take an extra $7000 per year over an extra $1000 per year any day of the week.

Comment by mathguy
2014-03-19 12:12:41

Put another way, the growth in the lower quintile ceiling exceeded the current median income of Brazil by 175%. The growth of the US median income (about 14k) exceeded the entire Brazil median income by 350% .

 
 
Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 11:40:57

The entire third world is benefitting from a lack of tariffs in the first world. The USA should reinstate our tariffs.

 
Comment by mathguy
2014-03-19 14:32:45

>Did the USA implement USA policies that economically improved the lives of 60 million Americans since 1994? No but Brazil did.

I think that when you raise the incomes of 80% of households by over $14k inflation adjusted, yes you are improving the lives of Americans. Did Brazil raise the incomes of 80% of it’s population by $14k? Answer: NO. The median (50%) income in Brazil is still under $4000 total. So just the increase in what the poorest American’s can buy is over 3 times the entirety of what a median Brazilian can buy. Hmm.. guess which system I would prefer if I was in poverty?

 
 
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 06:22:15

“Housing makes creditors rich…. and buyers poor. Very poor.”

No question. Paying in excess of $35/sq ft for a resale house is counted as loss. Your losses are magnified tremendously if you finance it for 15 or 30 years.

 
Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 06:23:52

linked from google news, white house announces new climate change website:

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-white-house-climate-change-data-website-20140318,0,5276497.story

remember the last time the white house launched a website? on 10/1/2013? that website, the obamacare website. it’s all just part of obama and hillary’s goal to cede u.s. soveriegnty to the united nations, because they hate american exceptionalism and individual hand of free market.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 07:33:54

From WUWT:

Un-cherry-picking and the Singer Event

Posted on March 19, 2014 by Guest Blogger

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

The dwindling number of paid or unpaid trolls commenting here – dwindling because the less dishonest and less lavishly-funded ones realize the game is up – do not like The Pause. They whine that in order to demonstrate a long period without global warming I have cherry-picked my start date.

No, I have calculated it. I have not, as they suggest, naïvely cherry-picked 1998 as my starting-point so as to take unfair advantage of the Great El Niño of that year. I have not picked 1998 at all.

Instead have determined by iterative calculation the earliest month in the record that shows no global warming at all as far as the present. On the RSS dataset, which I shall use for the analysis to follow, that month is September 1996, giving 17 years 6 months without any global warming.

 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 07:44:40

From the climatebet.com:

With 74 months of the Armstrong-Gore bet behind us and 46 months left to go, global mean temperatures have gone nowhere. That, of course, is the no-trend forecast that is the basis of Professor Armstrong’s bet. Mr Gore on the other hand claimed temperatures would go up, dangerously. In fact, most months of the bet (57%) have seen temperatures flat or down from the previous month. Professor Armstrong’s conservative forecast has been more accurate than Mr Gore’s alarmist forecast for nearly 69% of months so far.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 15:04:56

My problem with AGW, is that I think it is using science as a religion for political purposes. I have stated that I think many want to claim that natural warming as man-made so they can redistribute wealth in the world. NASAs data has been quite questionable lately and now comes this report:

http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/here-s-how-nasa-thinks-society-will-collapse-20140318

What is NASA doing being involved with a study that is social science at best? If NASA is advocating redistribution of wealth is it really a leap of logic to wonder if they are manipulating temperature data to help promote redistribution of wealth. The agency under Hansen seems to have filled its ranks with political scientists not climate scientists.

 
 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 11:32:30

Hey Goon, it is an inconvenient truth that smoking pot is killing the planet if you believe in AGW. Sad choice you have to make:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/03/17/earth-going-to-pot-marijuana-grows-in-california-produce-more-carbon-than-3-million-cars/

Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 11:52:10

Got Cheetos?

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 12:49:28

I really like this statistic:

◾The energy needed to produce a single joint is enough to produce 18 pints of beer, and creates emissions comparable to burning a 100 watt light bulb for 25 hours.

Beer leaves a far smaller carbon footprint per buzz. I think I should suggest that Miller/Coors put that on their app to sell beer to the Y generation.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by cactus
2014-03-19 14:06:35

“The energy needed to produce a single joint is enough to produce 18 pints of beer, and creates emissions comparable to burning a 100 watt light bulb for 25 hours.”

If it’s legal why are they growing it indoors? Grow lights , fans all that equipment that’s why its so energy intensive and expensive its a freaking weed.

 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 14:20:31

I don’t know better control of the growing conditions I would guess. Probably the cost of the electricity is less than the improve yields. Does free range pot sell for more, Cactus?

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 06:25:21

Realtors are nothing more than jailbirds on early release…..

Glorified jailbirds.

 
Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 06:32:36

Another Drudge link, here about transexuals in the military:

http://www.vocativ.com/culture/lgbt/next-dont-ask-dont-tell/?preview_id=64223&post_item=64714

And you think it’s a joke when I tell you Obama wants to force us into Sharia law gay marriages?

Thanks, Obama

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 07:28:21

And you think it’s a joke when I tell you Obama wants to force us into Sharia law gay marriages?

Thanks, Obama
Yea, now Lola can join the U.S. military. Thanks Obama.

 
Comment by LolaLOL
2014-03-19 07:35:50

Lola don’t salute!

Comment by X-GSfixr
2014-03-19 08:51:51

The US military is essentially a civil service program for Red-staters.

Don’t want any riff-raff jumping on the gravy train.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 12:50:36

Getting yourself blown up in Iraq and Afghanistan is the gravy train? Seriously?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Whac-A-Bubble™
2014-03-19 06:34:01

3 Reasons To Tap Into Home Equity To Buy Stocks
Jonathan Yates, Benzinga Staff Writer
March 17, 2014 2:52 PM

As home values are rising, so are the number of Americans taking out second mortgages. When (and if) done right, it is a very savvy move in personal finance.

Here are three reasons those owning real estate in the United States should unleash the equity to buy stocks.

The first is that it diversifies the core value of the largest asset of most Americans.

Buying stocks with the proceeds from a home equity loan diversifies the portfolio.

In addition, “There are tons of new loan types in existence today that mortgage loan seekers can take out, so many to choose from that it has become a smorgasbord of choices,” according to American Home Mortgage Solutions.

From that, property owners should be able to responsibly take out a mortgage to buy stocks for the long term. That adds protection to the investment portfolio of an individual.

There are many stocks that have dividend yields higher than mortgage rates.

As a result, investors can practice a form of interest arbitrage. Rates will be lowest on short-term loans, notes American Home Mortgage Solutions.

Stocks with high dividend yields can help to pay off the low-rate mortgage. Ironically, many real estate investment trusts (REITs) have very generous dividends. Hotel REITs such as Chesapeake Lodging Trust (NYSE: CHSP [FREE Stock Trend Analysis]) and Hersha Hospitality Trust (NYSE: HT) have yields over four percent.

Based on the performance of companies in the hotel industry that are publicly traded such as Wyndham Worldwide and others like cheaphotels.com, that sector has a bullish future.

Stocks are much more liquid than real estate.

At the “Invest for Kids” conference in Chicago last October, real estate investing legend Sam Zell said that a healthy asset market had liquidity. That means that assets can sell quickly. Stocks are much more liquid than real estate. It is a wise financial move to convert illiquid assets into ones that can be sold when needed.

Taking out a mortgage should be done with a great deal of responsibility.

That is what buying stocks is all about. Using the proceeds from a mortgage to buy equities can monetize a holding, increase the investment income and raise the level of liquidity for a portfolio. For long-term investing, there is nothing better.

Comment by apathy
2014-03-19 09:13:51

Come on, as if we needed a reason!

 
Comment by Al
2014-03-19 09:51:22

Borrowing to invest. It’s a win-win….. for the FIRE sector at least.

 
Comment by oxide
2014-03-19 10:04:34

There are many stocks that have dividend yields higher than mortgage rates.

Yeah, because stock prices always go up. :roll:

 
Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 11:37:20

Marge, I lost the house.

 
 
Comment by Whac-A-Bubble™
2014-03-19 06:36:13

Former Treasury Secretary Warns Of Looming Financial CRISIS

In a new documentary produced by Bloomberg Businessweek and distributed exclusively by Netflix, Henry Paulson, former President George W. Bush’s Treasury secretary recounts what happened during the financial crisis of 2008. In a classic “we must learn from history” stance, Paulson expresses concern about the current economic climate and claims that this concern, in part, motivated the production of the documentary.

In a Washington Times interview, Paulson wonders why Congress has not taken steps to reign in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, organizations that have only expanded in the years since the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) bailout. Paulson claims that the market for private mortgages has nearly disappeared, making mortgages far too dependent on entities such as Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Housing Authority (FHA). In order to avert a replay of the mortgage crisis, Paulson believes that no organization, government or private, should be considered “too big to fail.”

One reason that reform has not occurred, postulates Paulson, is that the Fannie and Freddie have returned to profitability, and this profit has been crucial in providing funding for the Treasury, which continues to struggle with deficit budgets. But Paulson’s concern goes beyond government entities. He also enumerates several private banks that have grown into the “too big to fail” category, but he praises the new regulations of Dodd-Frank that requires banks to have significant liquidity.

The documentary, “Hank: Five Years from the Brink,” recounts the events of 2008 and Paulson’s efforts in them. Paulson’s handling of the crisis was extremely unpopular at the time, yet he believes that he took crucial steps to avert a national disaster and an unemployment rate around 25 percent. Even though Paulson is confident about his decisions, he confesses in the documentary that he was distressed to learn that TARP was even less popular with the American people than torture.

Bloomberg Businessweek editor, Josh Tyrangiel, first approached Paulson about the documentary about a year ago. Believing that anniversaries focus public attention on significant events, Tyrangiel saw the impending five-year anniversary of the Wall Street meltdown as an educational opportunity. Tyrangiel convinced Paulson to participate in the documentary in order to explain why he made the choices he made. Naturally, as a tool of the media, the documentary also seeks to explore the personal emotional battles that were involved as well and create drama by using archived news clips.

Paulson, originally reluctant to participate in the project, hopes that the documentary will renew interest in the events of 2008 and help motivate leaders to take action to prevent another crisis. Part of his concern is illuminated in the film when he acknowledges that some of his solutions may actually exacerbate the problem. For example, Paulson remains concerned about how banks consolidated into larger banks that are “too big to fail” and how government dominates the housing market. Nevertheless, Paulson remains hopeful that the nation will be a haven for private mortgages once again.

Comment by Whac-A-Bubble™
2014-03-19 08:27:13

I guess one subject for debate would be whether we ever exited the last crisis (meaning we could potentially be at risk of entering a new one) or merely used a massive infusion of QE1, QE2 and QE3 to paper over the one we have remained in since 2007.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 09:25:58

I think all our policies since 2007 have been kick the can down the road and create even bigger bubbles. There is no question we are worse off now and when the bubble(s) break this time we will not be able to double the national debt.

Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 11:36:02

Yes, it’s been kicking the can.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 11:41:07

^ BINGO

 
 
 
 
Comment by Neuromance
2014-03-19 15:31:25

A dispassionate look at the costs and benefits of the response to the financial crisis? Or an auto-hagiography justifying the bailout of Paulson’s buddies?

That’s a toughie.

 
 
Comment by Housing Analyst
Comment by joe
2014-03-19 07:21:31

Arlington in a fierce battle with NW DC for dat chill rooftop bar scene. Arlington winning in terms of hotter women, losing in terms of marriageable women.

Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 07:58:52

I always thought Arlington and Crystal City was a FloozyFest.

 
Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 08:07:28

Loved your description of the douchebaggery of the D.C. rooftop bar scene.

 
 
Comment by polly
2014-03-19 12:11:17

Price per square foot up 6.4% (Did you really think I wouldn’t figure out how to change from the “sold in the past year (%)” data to the “sale price / sq. ft.” data?) Price per square foot up to $426.

Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 12:20:35

Nope.

Arlington, VA Housing Prices Crater 14% On Rising Inventory

http://www.movoto.com/arlington-va/market-trends/

 
 
 
Comment by Dolly Llama
2014-03-19 06:42:58

Is plane yet?

 
Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 06:47:23

Wall Street Journal - Should Salary Prospects Guide the Choice of a College Major?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303880604579405401129180782.html

According to the online article comments on any WSJ piece about student loans, anyone who didn’t major in STEM should just kill themselves now. Most of these comments coming from wise old STEM majors who did everything right and have never made a bad decision in their life, and who went to college when it cost less than $1000 a semester.

And literature and social sciences are for Europeans, socialists, and gays.

Anybody who reads a book for fun should be viewed with suspicion.

Comment by LolaLOL
2014-03-19 07:38:04

Major in grit, determination, focus, perseverance and work ethic. Don’t major in Twitter and Snapchat.

 
Comment by MiddleCoaster
2014-03-19 10:57:02

My niece majored in applied linguistics. Six months after graduation, she got a job with a marketing firm, has already been promoted and earned a pay raise. No one is more surprised than I am. ;)

Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 11:46:41

Your niece won’t be getting into Onwentsia either.

Comment by MiddleCoaster
2014-03-19 14:43:50

There must be very few Millenials who would even want to join. What is the average age of its members? 60? 70?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by the zima guy
2014-03-19 17:08:44

Is she cute?

Comment by rms
2014-03-19 19:06:43

“Is she cute?”

+1 Reality check.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by MiddleCoaster
2014-03-20 07:46:10

She is often mistaken for Taylor Swift. Seriously.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 11:03:33

Never mind the fact that I majored in STEM (well, just “S”), went to a relatively good (but state) school, graduated summa cud laude, and had to transition into a decidedly non-STEM peripheral field just to make a decent buck.

 
 
Comment by frankie
2014-03-19 06:53:16

Yesterday I was charged £82 for a wisdom tooth extraction that’s $136.29. Would that be cheap or expensive in the USA?

Comment by Dolly Llama
2014-03-19 07:12:00

That would be in several hundres in US I believe. Dentist alone would pocket that much.

 
Comment by Dolly Llama
2014-03-19 07:15:21

I still have my upper 2 wisdom teeth intact. I just visited dentist last week and he was encouraging/prodding me to extract those as they are difficult to clean and, etc. The dental higenist chimed in said “he takes care of those very well.” That shut up the dentist immidiately.

 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2014-03-19 08:54:39

That wouldn’t pay for the cotton balls over here.

Comment by frankie
2014-03-19 09:24:57

You get cotton balls, Luxury the best we could manage was to suck on a piece of damp cloth.

 
 
Comment by joe
2014-03-19 10:01:44

That’s dirt cheap. A regular check up/cleaning here in the US is more than that.

 
 
Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 06:58:51

Denver Business Journal - MillerCoors reveals digital game plan to reach Millennials:

“MillerCoors is doubling down on efforts to connect with Millennials where they are most often to be found: The digital space.

Noted MillerCoors Chief Marketing Officer Andy England: “Our customers live online and expect the brands that matter to them to embrace the digital world.”

http://m.bizjournals.com/denver/news/2014/03/19/millercoors-reveals-digital-game-plan-to-reach.html

What a joke. So creating a mobile app is supposed to make your sh*tty beer taste better?

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 08:51:46

What a joke. So creating a mobile app is supposed to make your sh*tty beer taste better?

If you can sell the millenials Obama with the right marketing, selling them sh*tty beer ought to be a breeze.

 
Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 10:52:10

It’s cheaper. Y-gen is broke.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 11:56:50

Except for the fact that they voted for Obama, I do genuinely feel bad for them. Obamacare taxes them to pay for a wealthier generation and the Social Security and Medicare Ponzi scheme will fail after they have paid into for decades since Obama rejected his own Simpson/Bowles commission recommendations and walked away from a deal he had struck with the Weepy eyes Speaker of the House to make them long term viable.

 
 
 
Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 07:09:03

Infowars website reports on possible catalyst to kick off “Go Time”

http://www.infowars.com/government-agency-if-9-substations-are-destroyed-the-power-grid-could-be-down-for-18-months/

Are you ready for Go Time?

Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 07:30:18

Speaking of Go Time, repost of Matt Bracken’s fiction piece about how it could all go down:

https://westernrifleshooters.wordpress.com/2012/09/03/bracken-when-the-music-stops-how-americas-cities-may-explode-in-violence/

And for those of you who think the above scenario is unpossible, go watch the 2014 Super Bowl Coke commercial and tell yourself it’s all good bro:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MEsOzzunPQ

Comment by phony scandals
2014-03-19 09:13:42

Video: Kid Screams in Agony As Cop Snaps His Arm

Some attempt to justify officer’s actions

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
March 19, 2014

Shocking video has emerged of a campus police officer violently breaking a student’s arm as he screams out in agony during an incident at West Brook High School in Beaumont, Texas.

Footage of the incident shows squabbles breaking out before a female officer grabs a male student and hauls him to the ground, aided by Officer Steve Rivers.

As the female officer presses the student’s face to the ground, Rivers grabs his left arm and violently bends it backwards in what appears to be a deliberate attempt to snap the bone. A sickening crunch is audible as the student screams out in agony. Although the kid is clearly in severe trauma, Rivers continues to push his head to the floor.

Following an investigation of the incident, which occurred on March 7, Officer Rivers was placed on administrative leave without pay.

http://www.infowars.com/category/featured-stories/ - 70k

 
 
Comment by Ethan in Norfolk VA
2014-03-19 09:35:10

I saw that on reddit a few days ago and the consensus would be that the grid is just a bit more isolated. Sure there might have to be rolling blackouts in some areas but it wouldn’t be a national shutdown by any means.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 12:02:28

I don’t see how it means go time. Maybe go time in the inner city to loot but outside there, people will get the flashlights out and keep the fridge shut to keep the coolness in and ride out the power outage.

 
 
 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2014-03-19 07:55:19

This is why Adan has become reduced to a name calling, bigoted, foaming at the mouth freak out. Because I talk about Supply-side’s giant failure - and yea! America is really starting to talk about it. So Adan bashes Brazil to take our mind off of this. But here’s America’s big problem.

How Corporatist-Conservative Policy Destroyed The American Economy

http://my.firedoglake.com/politicalpartypooper/tag/president-reagan/

Reagan instituted a phrase that conservatives use to this day: Trickle Down (or Supply Side) economics…Reaganomics. It is the philosophy that tax cuts for the top tier of American earners, and for Corporations will increase corporate profits, and create jobs through a trickling down process. This, coupled with President George H.W. Bush’s demand for a fast track on the North American Free Trade Agreement began America on a collapse from which we will never emerge unless drastic measures are taken.

……From supply side to deregulation, from tax cuts for corporations that ship American jobs overseas to the race to the bottom, conservatism does not work. It’s not real conservatism, anyway. Real conservatism looks more like the Libertarian party. The brand of Republicans calling themselves fiscal conservatives today aren’t conservatives at all; they’re Corporatists, and their every word and act reveals this. Against extending unemployment benefits that add $30 Billion to the deficit, but for extending the Bush tax cuts that add nearly $1 Trillion to the deficit..every year. That’s right; if we ended the Bush tax cuts today, our actual deficit would be somewhere around $600 Billion, and all of the Bush years would have seen budget surplusses.

How’s that for conservative economics?

America needs to reverse this corporatist-conservative train immediately. Free trade needs to end. Regulation needs to force the snakes into the open where they can be stomped on. The Bush tax cuts need to be allowed to sunset. Small businesses need to be able to get decent credit on decent terms instead of allowing the Mega Banks to deny them access. Tax tarriffs on American companies who ship jobs overseas need to be implemented, and protections that allow the American worker to compete with the rest of the world must be re-implemented. Economic growth happens from the bottom up. That’s an undisputed fact. No one spends more moeny than middle-class America, who are no where near the top of the “trickle-down” pyramid.

In the end, that’s what corporatist-conservatism became; a giant pyramid scheme. It’s time to nuke that pyramid. We don’t have much time. Ω

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 08:06:32

Lola, the only one foaming at the mouth is you. That is why you routinely get laughed at by the board, not just me many on this board. But keep defending the Brazilian economy, it destroys what little credibility you have. Maybe you can claim to be living in another country soon. Zimbabwe might work for you but they are heading down even faster than Brazil with its socialistic policies. Mugabe did reduce inequality when he seized the white farmers’ property. Of course, now they no longer are self-sufficient in food and malnutrition is rampant but better to be uniformly poor that have inequality right?

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 08:08:30

BTW, Mugabe like you loves to play the race card when he is losing or loosing as the board says.

 
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 08:08:37

Next week Lola will claim to be general contractor. Or did he already make that claim? ;)

I dunno but it would be hilarious to have a tranny on a construction site.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 08:27:11

Watching him walk in heels on a steel beam would be a hoot. Please don’t have a net below, unless it is needed to keep him from falling on someone.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by LolaLOL
2014-03-19 20:32:24

Anklepermits

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 08:11:26

Both of you are boring me.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 08:14:09
(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2014-03-19 08:13:55

That is why you routinely get laughed at by the board, not just me many on this board.

They’re not laughing. They are scared. As is your Koch Internet Propaganda Department manager.

Note to him:
Your employer Adan is not helping your cause. I think he needs a vacation.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 08:29:02

I think you have already received a note from your boss (Soros or sh#t lib congressman) that he or she does not like how you get schooled everyday.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 12:06:16

They’re not laughing. They are scared.

This is why you need to get back on your meds, delusional thoughts. You probably even think you look good in a dress. Sorry Lola but out of 100 trannies probably only one can really pull it off. Get a second opinion, just don’t post a picture, I had lunch about twenty minutes ago and I do not want to lose it.

 
 
 
 
Comment by mathguy
2014-03-19 15:38:52

If you’re going to lead with a headline like :

How Corporatist-Conservative Policy Destroyed The American Economy

You better show how that economy isn’t #1 in GDP worldwide..

 
 
Comment by mmrtnt
2014-03-19 08:27:27

Chasing terrorists is hot. Putting banksters in jail? Yawn.

Techdirt

 
Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 08:53:19

crater

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2014-03-19 09:01:27

Why do we have housing bubbles? Because we need them????? We should just wake up and admit it.

Trickle-down economics is the greatest broken promise of our lifetime

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/20/trickle-down-economics-broken-promise-richest-85

The richest 85 people in the world have as much wealth as the poorest 3.5 billion – or half the world’s entire population – put together. This is the stark headline of a report from Oxfam ahead of the World Economic Forum at Davos. Is there a reason why the world’s powerful, gathering at the exclusive resort to sip cognac and eat blinis, should care? Well, yes.

If one subscribes to the charitable view that neoliberal philosophy was simply naive or misguided in thinking that “trickle down” would work infinitely, then evidence that it doesn’t, should be cause for concern. It is a fundamental building block of supply-side economic theory – the tool of choice these past few decades for those in charge to make adjustments. The realisation that governments have been pulling at economic levers which, for some time, have been attached to nothing, should be a wake-up call to the deepest sleepers.

Comment by mathguy
2014-03-19 12:29:07

It’s funny, but some of those billionaires like Bill Gates have done more to help the poverty stricken than any government ever has. For instance, Gates has huge movements for clean water and malaria prevention going on that are preventing hundreds of thousands of deaths in Africa. He has a pretty good track record of efficiently directing his funds too.

The Waltons also built their fortune on delivery of low cost goods in an efficient manner. People are not refusing to take the jobs in their stores, even in big cities like Los Angeles and Boston, where other jobs are available, people are still working at and shopping at Wal-Mart.

Arguably, Microsoft and Wal-Mart have added more wealth to the economy than any government redistribution program could ever hope to.

 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 12:55:00

Why do we have housing bubbles? Because we need them????? We should just wake up and admit it.

HA and I have been saying that for years, glad you finally read our posts. However, it is globalization particularly giving WTO to China that has caused us to need the bubbles, thank Clinton and Bush II for their roles in giving China that status.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 12:56:20

Bush I but Bush II continued the old man’s policies.

 
 
 
Comment by apathy
2014-03-19 09:01:41

I have noticed a lot of debate on here about vacant housing. I looked at some national numbers this morning and came up with the following:

http://picpaste.com/Housing-HBX2bmxg.png

It looks like we had 13 million vacant houses in 1997, currently 22 million. Interestingly, this appears to have little to do with overbuilding. Based on the population growth and and the number of people per housing unit in 1997, we have built 88k too many homes give or take. However, contrary to what you read in the media about the ever shrinking number of people per household, when you divide the population by the number of non-vacant houses, you actually see that household size has increased from 1997 from 2.66 to 2.87 people per household. Based on 2.87 people per household, we have overbuilt by 1.3M housing units. I wonder if declining incomes and job prospects are keeping more people in the same houses, it appears so. The unprecedented aging population perhaps generates more extended families as well.

These numbers are total housing, so rentals and owned. It looks like vacant housing peaked in 2008 at 23.7 million and is starting to decrease.
I’m not convinced that this predicts a housing collapse versus typical mini-boom and bust cycles regionally. I base my guess loosely on the following:

1. There were 12 million vacant in 1989, 13 million vacant in 1997. So, there has always been vacant housing. That in itself doesn’t seem like it has been an issue.

2. Assuming that vacant housing is relevant, the last 5 years, we have not been producing enough housing units to account for population growth and destroyed units, thus the decline in vacant housing, and this might continue gradually chipping away at vacant housing or at least holding steady for a few years.

3. I think the location of vacant housing is more important for consumers. For instance, 20% of Detroit is vacant, does that affect the market in Dallas or Seattle? I would guess that any normal market has 5-10% vacant, some is abandoned, some foreclosures, some new large developments waiting to demolish large empty buildings, some are being rehabbed or renovated, some are rentals awaiting occupancy, etc. So, I think only the vacant houses in a given local market have an affect on buyers and sellers in that market.

4. This 22 million includes 3.6 million empty rentals. We are currently at historical lows in rental vacancy to the point that rents are getting painful in some markets, so is 3.6M vacant rental units a bad thing or a good thing? It will never approach zero. There were 2.9M in 1997.

5. The 22 million includes 4.4 million seasonal vacant houses. Relatively well off people both domestic and abroad are going to blow discretionary income however they feel like it, and it doesn’t appear that they plan to all sell there beach houses in the same month, so will that portion ever really contribute meaningfully?

6. Population migrations. As people flee cities 1970s and 1980s, old housing just rots in place. As people return for jobs and short commutes, old housing in the country and far out suburbs just rots. I don’t know if there is an accurate way to account for this. I know when I travel out in Virginia there are countless small rural towns with old downtown main streets. These towns always appear to be 1/4 or 1/3 or more vacant. The real estate prices are chump change, but no one is lining up to move there. I don’t know if that will change in 5,10, or 20 or more years. These remind me of the question of whether a tree falling in the woods makes a sound if no one is around to hear it. If 75% of the kids move away and the old people all die off, do these towns matter in the discussion? I don’t know the answer to that. I guess the land itself has value if you intend to raise livestock or farm it, but the structures dotting the landscape are worth very little whether they are occupied or vacant.

Anyhow, just some random thoughts. I do believe that people spend far too much of their income on housing, but I’m not sure what is going to balance that scale in the short run for buyers or renters given the psychology of the typical American consumer.

Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 09:32:58

Just post under your other user name. It will help your credibility.

Keep in mind:

-Population growth is all time record lows

-SFR rental vacancy rates are still 400% higher than trend

-Location matters not considering the 25 Million excess, empty and defaulted houses are distributed quite evenly.

-Housing demand is down to 1996 levels. There is no need for more housing. We already have tens of millions in excess.

Keep in mind that 35 million excess houses are just beginning to trickle onto the market as boomers begin to exit.

 
Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 09:44:27

First you say that we have more oversupply than before the bubble, but then you say that it doesn’t matter because there has always been some vacant housing. The magnitude of the change should set off red flags in an objective mind. We have nearly twice as much now.

Some of the vacant houses are in cities that used to thrive, but no longer do. You reason that these vacancies are irrelevant because everyone moved away. I call your attention to the law of diffusion. If Detroit becomes extremely cheap relative to San Francisco, then some companies (and retirees) in San Francisco are going to relocate to Detroit. You can throw out whatever theories you want about the demand for spoiled skilled workers who insist on coastal living, but that has never proven to be true. The minute a group of workers starts to get spoiled, they will be replaced. See Arizona vs California for reference.

The rental and vacation vacancies should not be considered separately from the owner-occupied (owner not-occupied?) vacancies. Either way, there are x people and y houses, with n people per house. That gives you the supply-demand numbers. Whether they rent or buy is determined only by the rent:buy cost ratio. If that’s out of whack, then it will correct itself.

You end your analysis with an unanalyzed reference to the psychology of the typical American consumer. Can you flesh that out for us? How does American psychology prevent Mr. Market from flushing people out? Hasn’t Mr. Market always flushed people out in this country?

Comment by apathy
2014-03-19 10:21:17

I’m just putting some thoughts down on the blog. A lot of people here are very concerned with “being right”. I’m more interested in discussion.

I have no idea if 22 million vacant houses is more of an issue today than 12 million was in 1989, I put the information down so people could see the long term change. It is definitely an increase from 1 for every 20 Americans to one for every 14 Americans. The big jump was from 13m to 16m 1998 to 1999 when the stock market crashed, only increased 6M more the last 15 years. My points were speculation as to why the vacant houses might not have a serious or immediate impact on housing prices or housing markets in contrast to some people that think vacant houses alone will make a huge difference.

One point to consider is that house prices have increased the last couple of years while the vacant properties have declined at the same time. So it would appear that a very slow draw down of these vacant properties might not trigger anything major.

My point about the American consumer is this: they are very willing to spend just about every last dollar they make and not worry about saving for tomorrow. (Those of us that spend time on sites like this probably much less so.) I see this every day in the form of expensive phones and phone plans, expensive cable/entertainment packages, expensive cars, expensive trips, high rental payments and high mortgage payments of people that I personally know. I also see articles like the ones yesterday on this site detailing how few Americans have any savings at all, like less $1000. I had that much saved in a couple months when I mowed lawns and bagged groceries at age 16 back in the late 90s.

So, as long as enough people are willing to spend most of their income on every day expenses, I don’t see rents and housing prices correcting in the short run. Over time I think they will moderate, as people decide that they want to do other more enjoyable things with their income.

Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 10:24:50

Of course you dont see housing prices correcting. Your entire wallet is predicated on the direction of prices.

Fraudster.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 10:42:23

My points were speculation as to why the vacant houses might not have a serious or immediate impact on housing prices or housing markets in contrast to some people that think vacant houses alone will make a huge difference.

In other words, you are rationalizing. That isn’t the same as trying to have a discussion. It’s what drug addicts and criminals do. They come up with the answer that makes their decisions sound correct, and then work backwards to come up with a reason as to why that makes sense.

One point to consider is that house prices have increased the last couple of years while the vacant properties have declined at the same time. So it would appear that a very slow draw down of these vacant properties might not trigger anything major.

Yes, that was the effect of institutional investors bidding against one another. They have left the building. They are still being foolish in some cities, but most cities are currently experiencing a drastic (and “unexpected”) increase in for-sale inventory now. The increase in inventory will bring us back down to the low-low prices necessary to compell people to actually purchase all that excess vacant housing.

So, as long as enough people are willing to spend most of their income on every day expenses, I don’t see rents and housing prices correcting in the short run. Over time I think they will moderate, as people decide that they want to do other more enjoyable things with their income.

There are some people who don’t know how to shop. If they see something that they want, then they will buy it. However, when it comes to a very large market (such as housing), the prices are set on the margin. As long as there are more sellers than buyers, then the shoppers will hold out for lower prices, thereby sending prices down. The non-shoppers will passively benefit from the bargaining activities of the shoppers. For reference, see giant bubble that just popped a few years ago. If your theory didn’t stop a crash then, it won’t stop a crash now.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by pazuzu
2014-03-19 16:53:01

apathy: “I don’t see rents and housing prices correcting in the short run. Over time I think they will moderate,”

So short run they don’t go down at all, over time they only stop going up? I guess it all depends on what you mean by “short run”, “correcting”, “over time” and “moderate” to tell if…

…you are just full of sh!t up to your eyeballs or swimming in an ocean of sh!t on a far away planet made completely of sh!t.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by joe
2014-03-19 09:58:35

My only question is, of the vacant homes, what % are actually habitable in their current condition? How many are tear-downs at this point? I’m thinking of houses in places like Detroit, Camden, etc.? Houses in northern states that haven’t been heated in 3-5 years. Houses in southern states (e.g. FL) that haven’t been A/C’d for a few years… could be total losses.

Or houses near Stockton/Modesto/Sacramento/Bakersfield or the Inland Empire, where the long-term jobs picture and high COL/taxes suggest long term demand will not be there?

I doubt the % is small.

Comment by "Uncle Fed, why won't you love ME?"
2014-03-19 10:13:11

If the banks have allowed their assets to deteriorate, then they will be losing money on them. Now the land will be purchased for a buck. How many asset managers have a strategy like that?

Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 10:41:30

None. It’s the same old narrative to downplay the housing debacle in general and it’s BS. Make a note of who invokes it here.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Al
2014-03-19 12:03:31

“If the banks have allowed their assets to deteriorate, then they will be losing money on them. Now the land will be purchased for a buck. How many asset managers have a strategy like that?”

Flaws with this:
1) in many cases the banks only service the loans. They have nothing to lose letting the houses deteriorate.
2) in areas like Detroit, the value of the house is close enough to zero even if it is maintained. Why bother maintaing them?
3) when the bank does hold the loan, they don’t have to recognize any loss until they sell, so there’s no short term risk to the manager’s bonus. If they spend on maintenance, there is a real cost now that can affect their bonus.

The above won’t apply in all cases. Some houses will be maintained and others won’t. I don’t suppose anyone has any data, or even anecdotal?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 12:27:33

Flaws with that

1) The servicer is paid to maintain the houses. See BofA

2) The input cost of the house or maintenance doesn’t change due to location.

3) Stock price takes precedence and determines bonus.

 
Comment by Al
2014-03-19 15:09:30

Found a few articles:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/08/us-usa-housing-blight-idUSBRE85707320120608

“Across America, bank-owned, blighted houses sit untouched, sometimes for years, disfiguring what in many cases are already troubled neighborhoods.”

“Yet even though the city of Los Angeles, with some fanfare, passed an ordinance two years ago compelling banks to repair blighted homes they own, or face fines, not a cent in penalties has been collected.”

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2012-04-29/news/fl-bad-neighbor-banks-preservation-20120429_1_customer-service-banks-property

“”When the servicer … discovers that the house isn’t worth much they’ll call up whoever is doing the work … and say ‘You’re done. Stop cutting the grass. Don’t go look every week to see if it’s still boarded up. We’re done,’” said retired law professor Kermit Lind, a consultant for the Municipal Housing Court in Cleveland, Ohio.”

http://www.nola.com/business/index.ssf/2014/03/us_bank_accused_of_housing_dis.html

“In response, Minneapolis-based U.S. Bank said the group’s claims are inaccurate because the bank is often the corporate trustee of an investment pool of properties with no legal right to maintain the houses.”

 
 
 
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 10:19:51

Liberace…. That topic Mz Craterton has been schooled. You too?

 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 12:14:25

I doubt the % is small.

Actually, I agree that many homes in California probably were built in the wrong areas and have been allowed to deteriorate to a point that they are no longer usable. However, the media is ignoring the rapid aging of coastal dwellers and that large homes close to the coast will be flooding the market, soon. The new inhabitants from Mexico do not have the income to buy those homes and use them as a SFO. As America grows poorer, and unless it changes its immigration, trade and welfare system it will, it will require less square footage of housing for each person. Just like a lot of old Victorian houses were converted to apartments or just rented rooms during the depression, I see a lot of modern houses being similarly converted.

Comment by cactus
2014-03-19 14:27:46

the media is ignoring the rapid aging of coastal dwellers and that large homes close to the coast will be flooding the market, soon. ‘

maybe.. what I see is foreign buyers buy them. At least in Places like Pacific palisades.

Wait for the big earthquake then you’ll see Ca homes prices drop. we had a 4.4 a few days ago 5 miles down in the earth near the Getty Center.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 15:14:49

It doesn’t seem like anyone is buying them.

Are you paying attention to demand?

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by X-GSfixr
2014-03-19 09:19:31

I’m starting to think that if an airline pilot wanted to off himself, he couldn’t have developed a much better plan than what happened to this Malaysian airliner. Especially if the family needed the insurance money.

You’ve got to admire the plan. Until they find the airplane, nobody can prove anything. And there aren’t many places better to make an airplane disappear than the south Indian Ocean.

If he had access to the CVR and FDR in flight, and could unbolt the underwater pingers from them (all it takes is an Allen Wrench) either before or during the flight and dispose of them, they will never find the airplane.

And think about it…….he would be joining that illustrious group of aviators who disappeared without trace, like Amelia Earhart, Charles Nungesser, and Charles Kingford-Smith.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
Comment by In Colorado
2014-03-19 12:51:08

Doesn’t Iran already have airliners they could use as “stealth weapons”? They could load the bombs into a regularly scheduled flight to say Amman, Jordan, then fly it into Israel.

Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 13:03:11

I do not think they have been able to buy a new commercial jet for quite awhile and we would know the planes they do have. I think the theory is that since Iran does not own a 777 if one crashes into Israel, it might be much harder to claim that it came from Iran. We could probably still trace any Iranian plane back to them from parts left in the wreckage if it was not a nuclear explosion but this plane would be traced back to Malaysia.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by In Colorado
2014-03-19 13:19:36

If Israel got nuked they would retaliate against Iran, they wouldn’t need proof.

Plus I think it would be pretty tough to slip an unregistered jet past Israeli defenses. If a transponderless, unscheduled 777 suddenly appeared I doubt it would get past Israel’s borders.

 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 13:37:01

I do not disagree. But most plots do fail but it does not keep people from trying. You only have to have one succeed once in a while. And perhaps you get lucky and Israel does something stupid and shoots down the wrong 777 because its transponder is not functioning.

 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 13:39:12

That is the beauty of this operation, even if they just ditched it in the ocean at the end of the day, they have numerous intelligence agencies tying up resources trying to find the plane.

 
 
 
 
Comment by MiddleCoaster
2014-03-19 11:09:31

Too bad this one had to take almost 300 other people down with him.

 
 
Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 12:32:35

The fraudster huddle is over. Play #2.

Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 13:27:00

$200 per square foot minimum asking price in the 80113, whether it’s a $250K crack shack in Englewood or a $2M palace in Cherry Hills Village.

Comment by Housing Analyst
2014-03-19 15:09:24

Where are the buyers?

Comment by real journalists
2014-03-19 16:30:17

In the $250,000 to $350,000 range, they are abundant.

The yuppies are ruining this city, you have no idea what it’s like unless you live here every day. Equity locusts, job transfers, overpaid STEM grads, they’re buying anything available.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Albuquerquedan
2014-03-19 13:56:48

When they hit oil the European nations will be lining up to buy it, time for someone to post again that Obama as Miley cartoon:

MOSCOW, March 18 (Reuters) – Russian state-owned energy company Gazprom has proposed to develop Crimea’s oil and gas sector, an official of the Ukrainian region which has applied to join Russia was quoted by RIA news agency as saying on Tuesday. “Of course, Gazprom was the first to approach us (with a proposal),” said Rustam Temirgaliev, Crimea’s first deputy prime minister. He was asked if the Ukrainian region, which declared its independence and applied to join Russia following a weekend referendum, had received proposals from Russian companies to develop its oil and gas industry. A Gazprom spokesman declined comments. Last week, Temirgaliev said that the local authorities may sell the energy firm Chornomornaftohaz to a Russian company “such as Gazprom” once the region takes control the firm, which is now part of a Ukrainian state energy company. A Moscow-backed referendum in Crimea on Sunday showed overwhelming support for joining the Russian Federation. - See more at: http://www.rigzone.com/news/oil_gas/a/132147/Gazprom_Proposes_Oil_Gas_Development_in_Crimea#sthash.UYGqOOBG.dpuf

 
Comment by Bill, just South of Irvine, CA
2014-03-19 19:12:12

Should we discount the history of the ten year treasury yield versus the price of gold over the long term?

From 1971 to 1980 10 year rates went from 5% to 15% while gold went from $35 to $850. Then from 1980 to 2001 10 year yields went from 15% to 5% while gold dropped to $250.

So what about after 2001? I checked the basic chart of gld versus ^TNX for the max and GLD appears around 2005. Somewhere around 2006 GLD goes way up while the 10 year yield drops. This is in line with conventional thinking. And from 2011 on, the 10 year yield goes up while GLD falls.

So are the rules changed after 2001?

Comment by Bill, just South of Irvine, CA
2014-03-19 19:32:48

My conclusion is that gold is bought and sold for different reasons that bonds are bought and sold and have have nothing to do with interest rates. Gold buyers fully know there is no yield on gold bars. But they buy the gold bars or coins still.

Bring on the rate hikes Yellen! I buy both assets - treasuries and precious metals, for different reasons. I will continue to buy them. I sell off some assets for various reasons that may not be correlated with the economy, but most likely my own spreadsheet when I need to raise money.

In 2010 I sold off gold. Not all, but some. Before it peaked a year later. I needed some cash and gold was my best performer. I kept buying stocks.

In 2013 and now I am selling batches of my former company stock since it’s done very well and keeps surprising. The only individual stocks that look good to me are precious metals mining stocks. Everything else is bubbly. So I only buy my stock mutual funds and occasionally more shares of gold mining ETFs. When I sell shares of some of my staffing company stock I put a big amount in cash and reserve a small part of that for stacking precious metals bullion. This is a long term deal and I intend to do this habit of selling my biggest gainer asset every few years to buy more of my worst asset class.

 
 
Comment by Bill, just South of Irvine, CA
2014-03-19 19:38:26

My eye doctor and I were discussing Porsches. He told me he likes them but his cars are diesel cars with 350,000 and 750,000 miles on them. He borrowed Porsches a couple of times many years ago and enjoyed them.

He told me just an oil change on the high end Porsches costs (1…2..3) $2700!

For the Porsche Cayman an oil change is $750.

He said my best bet would be to take the $2700 and go on a cruise.

Reality bites, don’t it? Wealthy older doctors driving old diesel cars with high mileage. That goes in line with what Stanley and Danko were saying about wealthy people in general - they are cheap. The $30k millionaires drive the high end cars.

I think I will rent a Porsche at some point. But for my next car purchase, I think I will even reconsider MB and pass that one up for Toyota. I drive a Toyota now and it’s 11 years old. If I need another car it will be the latest model of the one I drive.

Some doctor advice is very good to take.

Comment by Captain Credit Crunch
2014-03-19 22:04:36

That much for an oil change is robbery. Porsche makes the engine and many other components completely user serviceable. I can jack up my car and change the oil in an hour or so. 9 quarts of Mobil 1. A $10 Mahle filter, a few rubber gaskets and a few washers. You need a couple special wrenches Perhaps, but no big deal. $100 tops in materials. And that’s for one of their biggest engines.

 
Comment by Captain Credit Crunch
2014-03-19 22:06:06

No doubt though that Diesel engines run cooler and can last forever. My next beater may be a bmw 335d, if my current Acura EVER dies (190k).

 
 
Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Trackback responses to this post