Meanwhile, savers continue to suffer with 0% income on their savings and healthy banks continue to subsidize the weaker ones through FDIC insurance.

And of course, the Fed absorbs trash.

Heads up to the MSM: Losses, like toxic waste, do not disappear. They just get moved to a different balance sheet.

MrBeach wrote:

suffer with 0% income on their savings

negative real income on their savings.

tfify

Is this the same Treasury that could not forecast this whole economic meltdown thingy occurring before Bear lay dead on The Street?

WAIT! I GET IT!!! This is the expected losses from TARP 1. TARPs 2, 3, 4 & 5 will be total losses.

The ad at the bottom of the page, is for iNet Boat Loans, it says great rates, and a free gas offer. Nothing has been learned. shop for boats on e bay instead.

tg wrote:

negative real income on their savings.

Thanks.

Lets do a simple calculation: I think I saw that about $3.5 trillion was sitting in MM funds.

At 5%, that would be $175 billion in interest/yr.

Going from 5% to 0%, means $175 billion in foregone interest that can now fall directly to the bottom line.
To this we should add the money that the Fed is now paying on bank reserves (anyone wanna SWAG this?)

From this we subtract the losses being taken on lending.

Yeah - for the moment, it appears that banks are once again flush.

But what happens if the losses continue to mount?

according to the NYT article the estimates of tarp loses have gone from 341 billion last summer...to 100 billion and now down to 42 billion

i agree with hollywood hack that given the games the fed has played at "the window" accepting trash MBS and other assorted crap in exchange for us treasuries is a ticking financial time bomb (my words not his)

but the two programs are not the same

in our zeal, to lambaste the miscreants in DC and NYC for banksterism

are we possibly turning a blind eye to any progress at all?

i agree with Rob Dawg that as long as unemployment is sky high and climbing we are effed (again my word not his)

but this story is...what it is.... nothing more

lets see if the number 41 billion comes to pass...like you im skeptical

but willing to wait and see

but nothing i read above contradicts the new york times article CR posted

TARP I will be repaid in full with the advent of TARP II

following from the last thread, because I've got fraud on the mind
Anyone expect any lawsuits when it turns out there was accounting fraud through Level 3, or CDS were under-reserved, or that insurance companies and pensions chose impossible expectations for their valuations, or that the "stress test" was designed backwards starting from the results they wanted to report?

longwaver wrote 10:49 pm

"And a government forecast for anything is worth what again?"

i dont think the government made that prediction in 75 (ford administration?)

back then there was good reason to think that in the coming centuries (they never said tomorrow) we would enter a new ice age

the natural record indicated grand cycles of 95 thousand years ( orbital eccentricity) 42k yrs orbital obliquity) and 12k yrs ( rotational precession) due to the milankovitch cycle

the newer warning about climate change have noting to do with predicting the milankovitch cycle or other natural events that effect climate

i dont know if 20 billions metric tons of CO2 into the air every year will win thee tug of war with the natural cycle of ice ages

i think (guess) it will

but the forbes article is simplistic and unreasonably vituperous in its argument

mock turtle wrote:

but the two programs are not the same

But they are. Under TARP, Uncle Sam issued a large quantity of Treasuries, and injected the cash thus obtained into the banking sector. Effectively a taxpayer-guaranteed loan to the banking sector, funded by investors' cash. But whence flowed the cash?
Ahh, lookie here! We have the Federal Reserve doubling its "balance sheet" to buy Treasuries and Agencies (which are nearly equivalent to Treasuries, given the nationalization of Fannie and Freddie). Net result is a loan of newly-minted cash from the Federal Reserve to the banks, collateralized by the assets and "earning power" of the banks, with the taxpayers on the hook in case the banks fail to make good.

Now, look at the Fed's other program. Bankers walk up with trash MBS, walk away with Treasuries and sell them for cash. Federal Reserve doubles its balance sheet to "buy more" Treasuries and Agencies. Banks have to back the MBS loaned to the Federal Reserve in the event that they are no longer AAA-rated (or something like that)... Net result is a loan of newly-minted cash from the Federal Reserve to the banks, collateralized by the assets and "earning power" of the banks, with the taxpayers on the hook in case the banks fail to make good.

Read the last sentence of each paragraph and tell me what's different, exactly?

This would be inflationary except that most of the relevant inflation (expansion of money and credit) already occurred. It occurred when the house and stock markets inflated. That was done with shadow bank credit, which the Federal Reserve has now made explicit. They had the choice of ratifying the banks' stealth inflation of "asset values" or allowing the FIRE sector to re-equilibrate with the real economy through asset deflation, and they blinked. (Congress blinked too -- they raised the minimum wage by a large chunk to ratify the inflation as well.) The next problem is that the people's agents in government also failed to rein in the creation of yet more shadow bank credit, so the stage was set for yet another inflationary asset bubble...

Meanwhile, the real economy struggles under tremendous friction from the burden of servicing the huge, and generally non-productive population in the FIRE economy. "Credit intermediation" is "productive friction"...

Family beckons, alas. Look forward to catching up (briefly) in the morning...

Mock-

I think it's pretty clear the administration has shifted the TARP costs into other areas. I can think of three offhand:

(1) The previously accumulated capital of the FDIC and the housing agencies, which is being depleted to absorb losses that could have been borne by others.
(2) Fed purchases of impaired securities at inflated values.
(3) Government guarantees that allow the banks to make trading profits and access private capital, but which could have an enormous cost if things go south again.

I am glad if the point of all this is to get rid of TARP, because the TARP was a terrible way to structure the bailout. But I don't see much more accountability in the programs that have replaced the TARP, and I don't believe the TARP repayments reflect any real improvement in the country's overall economic condition.

well put, WS.

increasingly, I think of the current greenback as much like a human life which began when BW was dumped - in the late 70s, a bratty kid, in the 80s, somewhat well-behaved under the stern eye of uncle Volker, in early adulthood, an utter psychopath, now, a homeless junkie who looks 55 at 38..

mock turtle wrote:

many of us have transitions into a zone of less analysis and in favor of venting our spleens

Yes, guilty as charged. The deficit was only 1.4T last year vs. a projected 1.8T. While terrible, it is less terrible that I expected.

Still, there is so much [I think is] wrong about the system that it sometimes blinds me to the parts that actually work.

The employment news is encouraging. The TARP news is encouraging.

What happens when the Extend and Pretend phase is over? Another huge issue surrounding the Fed QE driving rates into the ground. All those diligent savers earning very little and encouraged to go out on the risk curve.

Let's not forget the govi deficits. We have to go back to October 2002 to find lower October receipts.

Adllen C said
"Let's not forget the govi deficits"

yeah the deficits are crushing

and thats why i take issue with our friends who say there are lessons from past recessions or the great depression

where we are at today as a country and society is off the charts

nothing like the past

around the time of the GD or just prior, the usa was the "china" of that time...we exported industrial and agricultural goods like crazy

before WWII we had a far favorable balance of trade and gov deficit situation

i really am concerned that this time we have boxed ourselves into a corner and there is no good way out

and as you know i suspect the puppet masters have rigged it this way by design

which political or corporate leaders want to tell the american people we cant live so high on the hog

look at what the press and what passes for our leadership did to carter when he put on a sweater and turned down the heat

indeed, mt. our midwestern agricultural production set the crimean into permanent decline because they couldn't compete in the late 19th century. also an era of crushing deflation (see 'cross of gold'). we also had no problem with sending a 9-year-old into a coal mine for 10 hours.

anyone here read Tim Harford? perhaps he's too mainstream
but here's a seasonal piece that's well done:
FT.com / Weekend columnists / Tim Harford - It’s not just Scrooge who wants Christmas abolished
It’s not just Scrooge who wants Christmas abolished

that was the 89 billion that was talked about in the papers on top of the 200+ program already in existence? or do I have my figures mixed up... I think I read about it in the Guardian.

side note on Swine Flu, we've had our 5th death here in cambodia
all deaths up to this point happened to people who had compromised
respiratory systems... the head of this nation's version of CDIC called
it a relatively mild virus...
...
at the height of the garment manufacturing here (2008) about 300,000 were
employed now the number is about 200,000.
...
80+% was destined to the US market... anyone know about the tariff
reduction that awaits action in US Congress that would greatly affect Cambodia?
...
found out about a rare Cham (Indochinese Muslims) house situated in Kampong Cham that has been given to the KR Documents Center here in Phnom Penh by a woman who is now in Malaysia and fled when the KR came into power. problem is that they don't have any funds to maintain it. I might go out to take a look at it. do know one woman in USA who has millions and funds museums and buys massive amounts of art - don't know if she's into architectural preservation or not, maybe worth a try....

EHP - love the last article. Asia rebound anyone? Decoupling? Seconds of second-round effects? Such a menu.

I remember a presentation of quite jaw-dropping hubris from a Philippines government official in 2006 or so about securitizing remittance flows, which naturally would grow ad infinitum, and be a significant source of governmental collateral. My gentle enquiries about de facto state appropriation of private funds were quickly dispatched, and the rest of the discussion revolved around the iniquities of the ratings agencies for finding some dificulty in rating such an asset class. (To an extent this was a good point, since all manner of crud was being rated, but nothing quite as brazen as nationalizing future remittances).

C

Duke of Con Dao,
Tariff reduction or not for Cambodia, the efforts to promote trade with central american countries has altered the textile export market. Labor is cheap and logistics are cheaper, if not tariffs too (for strategic reasons)

Counterpointer
If I didn't know any better, I would call you a quack for that interesting anecdote on future remittance flows.
Sounds like it will be raining something or other in Japan before week's end, perfect for the samurai umbrella

Extra downtime for six Chrysler plants - The Globe and Mail
Chrysler Group LLC is shutting its two Canadian assembly plants and four other North American assembly plants for extra downtime this month and in January after a dismal sales performance in November, in stark contrast to big production increases at Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Co.

oh wow, who could have seen this coming when production ramped up to the high side of 12mn US SAAR auto sales mid-year, while 10mn sales is a good month

EHP
"Tariff reduction or not for Cambodia, the efforts to promote trade with central american countries has altered the textile export market."
Are you speaking of the effort to expand Nafta? Or does this include countries not on
that list? Your argument does seems to make more sense I just don't know what a garment worker makes say in Colombia. Here it is 65 to 92 dollars a month, the 92 level is reached with lots of overtime, something that's rare now. Can central americans work for this little?

EHP -

Rachel's returns weren't all that complicated. At issue, though, was that she and her two sons, ages 10 and 8, were all living at her parents' house in Rainier Beach (she pays $400 a month rent).

An interesting situation.
1) There is no IRS requirement to financially support your child in order for them to be your dependents or for them to qualify you for Earned Income Credit.
2) If she had married and never divorced, then she would have to file as married, and unless filing jointly would have to file as Married Filing Separately, which allows dependencies but would disqualify her from Earned Income Credit. That probably isn't the situation as the IRS eventually allowed her that credit. [The children WOULD qualify her for the EIC if she in fact provided more than half of their support, in which case she would be able to file as Head of Household.]

This is an example that demonstrates that the returns of low-income people with children ARE complicated. Determining dependency is one of the most challenging aspects of tax prep for this type of situation.

BUT...I just realized you don't care. You're a Canuck.

Duke of Con Dao
Don't take my word on Cambodia vs Central America textiles + tariffs as gospel, I've got just a vague passing knowledge from snippets
In Bush's second term there was a lot of FTAs signed, aiming towards a larger CAFTA, to beat the South American Mercador to the punch and provide some stability to unstable countries that were both general concerns for the US and the source of illegal immigrants
I remember at least a couple of companies moving their textile production to a place like Honduras. I don't know what the quota is, but they might the first choice for production until it is filled -- the few things I would guess Asia might have better is domestic experience (managers, tax structure, laborers), the capacity for to ramp volume, and now regional production of inputs like cotton, dyes, machinery
People literally get by on mud patties in Haiti, so I'm sure they could compete with Cambodians on a $ cost. Plus because of the proximity, the production lead time is much shorter (important for the seasonal lines). Although I presume the FTAs probably made central america the cheapest location of production for econo-political considerations, with everything else just being details the corporations look after without much difference between locations

Good to hear that markets are finally showing signs of recovery.

Writing Services: Custom essays, custom term papers, research papers, & Essay Help & Free Samples.

Quite a lot of the Philippines is outside of central government control...even supposedly peaceful areas. Clans have increasing power.

EHP
"Plus because of the proximity, the production lead time is much shorter (important for the seasonal lines)""
I assume you are speaking of Leslie Wexner's famous metric of 100 days from sketch pad to item on shelf.
I doubt that that metric has been improved much upon, at least it was operative in 2004 in NC garment trade.

Quality Research - nice try,

Next time, spend more than a couple of minutes on your spam target. I know it says finance and economics, and it was a worthy attempt at naked ingratiation, but there's just something about this board that we can tell when the swing doors of the saloon open and it doesn't feel right.

So, take your cheat notes pay-per-fraud service and jam it up your ethical fundamentals. If I may quote from your URL...

"Our Commitment

We abide to the highest levels of Integrity, Morality, Ethics and Values"

Uh huh.

C

Purple-

Is that handle a reference to The Flying Sorcerers by Niven and Gerrold?

"Climb Mount Nikkei"

Perhaps we are seeing two things happening with the economy?

1. A recession. People, regardless, of their financial balance sheets, quit buying. Now some are, albeit tenatively. Hence the rise in employment, manufacturing, etc.
2. Behind that is a balance sheet, debt depression. The effects are still continuing, but the smaller rebound in the recession is seen as the healing of both? Did this not happen in the 30's?

Loss of "$42 billion of the $370 billion" is based on $30 billion loss at AIG.

"The estimated $42 billion in losses is a net figure that accounts for some profits to offset the losses. The Treasury officials said the government had lost about $60 billion, roughly half to Chrysler and General Motors and the other half to the insurance giant American International Group. "

Good morning all: Gabyjan, exactly because the losses coming in CRE are going to make RRE look tame. There is a lot off balance sheets and not reported in Tier 1 Capital statements for unsecured loans.

I've been away and I don't know if this was discussed earlier (time is limited for me so forgive me if it was discussed) but I think the next leg down will be on a currency crisis. Dubai unloaded its Citi shares after converting preferred to common and made a few billion on the sale (on Sunday no less).

"Abu Dhabi's International Petroleum Investment Co. made a $2.5 billion profit in June by selling part of a stake it held in London-based Barclays. Then last moth, Qatar's sovereign wealth fund, the British bank's top shareholder, unloaded a stake worth about $2.25 billion.
Barclays turned to investors from Abu Dhabi and Qatar last November for a total injection of up to 7.3 billion pounds ($12 billion) to shore up its balance sheet rather than take on the British government as a major shareholder."

Sovereign funds, together valued at about $3.2 trillion, operate as government-owned, special purpose investment vehicles.

Kuwait Investment Fund Sells Citigroup Stake for $4.1 Billion - Bloomberg.com

These capital flows may well decide the inflation/deflation debate, IMO.

Nanoo-Nanoo wrote:

These capital flows may well decide the inflation/deflation debate, IMO.

yes it is a lot of 'money', well contained yet just beyond the grasp od the Fed

always was warned not to let my reach extend beyond my grasp

"The article notes that this will reduce the deficit significantly this year."
.

.....now just yesterday, I read that thru the first two months of this fiscal year (Oct & Nov - 2010), we've already spent more FedGov monies than LAST year - this also due to decreased tax revenues. It was pointed out we were already ahead of the $1.41-trillion record breaking deficit of last year. More "hope and a prayer" kind of stuff?

I'll believe a ten-year old's "boogeyman under the bed" meme moreso than any BS outta DC or written trash from some NYC rag.............Good Morning....

gabyjan wrote:

warning pdf

didja read it? well I did.

I know, I have no life.

Although I can agree with much of what was presented in this short 4 page double spaced 14 point type. They lost me when they brought in the Markov Switching Model reference in determining their result. I say determining because there surely wasn't any calculating going on.

after all we don't identify here as Determined Risk

....LOL......not for another couple hours........I let the gals sleep in on Mondays.........we might get snow this week! The snow level is down to 2500-feet! Snow in the desert - imagine THAT!........Morning, volker..

No Escape From TARP for U.S. Banks Choking on Real Estate Loans - Bloomberg.com

ugh.

black star ranch
no it isnt i was there.then

This was probably taken around the time BomberBen was slinging burritos.
Southern Comfort « AwkwardFamilyPhotos.com

Meeeeester Benito,

Can we have some more chips y salsa?

charles hugh smith-Weblog and Essays

"---Paying your taxes with a credit card?
Priceless. "

....try paying your tax bill with cash..........they REALLY dislike THAT!

Colder than a witch's tit for tat, here...

http://pictopia.com/perl/get_image?provider_id=876&size=550x550_mb&ptp_photo_id=6212598

homeGnome
is that a tomato plant? omg!

Gold: For newbies and weakhands, please pick up your pumice bars and move to the next station.

The enemy of tomato growers everywhere:
http://birdcarvings.net/TOMATO%20HORNWORM%206.JPG 

Nanoo<
Project on Student Debt: State by State Data

I think your missing the point of the 'value' you receive when paying your taxes for the educational system.

Just think, some csulb grad now has a great job as a real-whoure selling marked-up properties in laguna nigel...all because of you!

that things got a really Hot pink tail!

so'dam sexy

Isn't it interesting how the mic recruiting tactics have changed with the economy?

About 5 years ago, they raised the maximum age limit for a dogface g.i. to 42, and they were accepting rabble of all flavors, in desperation to find meat for the grinder...

One of the services announced that they had met their recruiting objective for the year, a month ago or so, and you almost never see recruitment tv commercials anymore.

Understanding what caused the financial crisis is crucial to capitalism’s future. Once we see what really happened, we find a conception of capitalism different than that entertained by either its conservative defenders or its liberal critics.

For American banks, the answer seems to be an obscure regulation called the Recourse Rule. The Rule was enacted by the Fed, the FDIC, the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Office of Thrift Supervision in 2001. It was an amendment to the international Basel Accords governing banks’ capital reserves—and all over the world, these regulations appear to have caused the crisis.

A bank’s capital reserves represent funds that aren’t lent out or invested. This means that they are unprofitable, but they also might come in handy should a bank’s loans or investments turn sour. By reducing their reserves—and thus increasing their leverage—banks can, at least in principle, increase their profitability. But under the Recourse Rule, American commercial banks were required to hold 80 percent more capital against commercial loans, 80 percent more capital against corporate bonds, and 60 percent more capital against individual mortgages than they had to hold against asset-backed securities, including mortgage-backed securities rated AA or AAA. The Rule thus created a 60-80 percent incentive to buy highly rated MBS for any bank that wanted to reduce its capital reserves.

The Rule did not apply outside America, but the first set of Basel Accords on bank capital, adopted in 1988, included provisions for even more profitable forms of “capital arbitrage” through off-balance-sheet entities such as structured investment vehicles, which were heavily used in Europe. Moreover, in 2006, a second set of accords began to be implemented outside the United States. Basel II took essentially the same approach as the Recourse Rule, encouraging foreign banks to take on-balance-sheet leverage in the form of mortgage-backed securities, just as in the United States.

Here we have the genesis of the global financial crisis. And it has nothing to do with capitalism.

My wife loves to feed those to the chickens-

......LOL......there's no better feeling in the world then to see chickens madly tearing apart horned worms.....

BSR/HomeGnome: I saw a monarch butterfly caterpillar last week crawling along its been so freaking warm here. Winter starts in earnest this week though, we had a little snow. Snow and cold is essential to the flora/fauna in this neck of the woods and the balance. So we are getting our improvements done just in the nick of time it seems.

We tied the record going back into the early part of the last century for measurable snowfall in the valley. It was on lake effect, not synoptic system though. We will get synoptic snows this week and orographic snows too. finally. Its depressing here without snow.

How Conservatives and Liberals Get Capitalism Wrong

So the Great Recession was a regulatory failure, not a failure of capitalism. But it is also an occasion for rethinking capitalism—by both its conservative defenders and its liberal critics.

Let’s start with the conservatives, many of whom mistakenly extol the brilliance, wisdom, or heroism of capitalists. They forget that for every Jamie Dimon, there is a Chuck Prince. Capitalists are as fallible as anyone else. Collectively, they possess no superior powers; their profitable guesses, no matter how educated, are still guesses. Everyone can see this in the wake of the crisis. Paeans to capitalist genius will no longer do.

The Great Recession was a regulatory failure, not a failure of capitalism. But it is also an occasion for rethinking capitalism—by both its conservative defenders and its liberal critics.

Seventy-three percent of the successful entrepreneurs recently surveyed by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation said luck was an important factor in their success. These successful capitalists’ own assessments happen to be congruent with the standard liberal view. John Rawls—the great philosopher whom conservatives love to loathe but hate to read—pointed out that good luck, including even the good luck to have a strong work ethic, confers no moral claim. Winners of the genetic lottery are not thereby entitled to be rewarded, Rawls said—unless their talents serve those less happily born.

Liberals are right to notice that good luck explains many capitalists’ success, and that bad luck—accidents of birth—condemn millions to lives of misery. Conservatives who close their eyes to the accidental element in wealth and poverty make themselves appear both heartless and clueless.

In addition to their unfortunate romanticizing of capitalists, conservatives have done badly to adopt the economists’ standard explanation for the success of capitalism: self-interest. Self-interest is supposed to be the “magic of the market,” but we can safely assume that Chuck Prince was every bit as self-interested as Jamie Dimon. Both of them had equally strong incentives to save their banks, but that didn’t help Citigroup. UCLA economist Armen Alchian showed in 1950 that capitalism would succeed even if capitalists weren’t motivated by self-interest—and many capitalists, such as the founders of Google and Whole Foods, were not motivated by self-interest.

Liberals fail to notice that there’s more to capitalism than luck and greed: there is competition—the saving grace of the whole system, and, when undisturbed, the source of its strength.

Unfortunately, economists have only grown more obsessed with self-interest, i.e., “incentives,” since 1950. This has led many conservatives to embrace the idea that “greed is good”—a woeful misreading of Adam Smith (or Ayn Rand). Smith’s parable of the baker, to whose benevolence we do not appeal when we buy our bread, is actually a lesson in unintended consequences, not in the wonders of greed.

The baker intends to make money, but he can do so only by providing his customers with bread. In his case, greed is indeed good. But that doesn’t mean that greed is always good, or benevolence bad. Nor does it mean that greed accounts for the success of capitalism.

How Liberals Get Capitalism Wrong

Liberals are correct to see through the usual defenses of capitalism. But they are wrong on the big picture. They fail to notice that there’s more to capitalism than luck and greed: there is competition—the saving grace of the whole system and, when undisturbed, the source of its strength.

Competition is the engine that turns lucky talents to the service of all—meeting Rawls’s criterion of justice. A baker who offered moldy or tasteless bread would be driven from the field by a competitor offering a better product. That is the message of Adam Smith. The successful baker, no matter how greedy, must unintentionally mimic the very actions an altruistic Rawlsian philosopher would prescribe.

Since regulators’ and citizens’ ideas are imposed on the whole system at once, they can’t be put to the competitive test.

The reason is the competitive nature of the capitalist system; the motives of individual capitalists are irrelevant. Competition puts capitalists’ different motives and ideas to the test of consumer satisfaction. This tends to give consumers what they want—and it diversifies a capitalist society’s investment portfolio. Capitalism thus mitigates both human greed and human fallibility. This is an amazing achievement, but there’s nothing magical about it.

Now consider the alternatives that liberals tend to favor—either the regulation of capitalism or its replacement by something more democratic.

Since regulators’ and citizens’ ideas are imposed on the whole system at once, they can’t be put to the competitive test. If their ideas are good, we all gain; if they are bad, we all lose. The whole system crashed when the financial regulators’ ideas turned out to be bad, but this is inevitable unless modern societies are so simple that solutions to social and economic problems are self-evident to a generalist voter, or even a specialist regulator.

Just that assumption is, in truth, the hidden premise of both sides in most political debates. This is why politics gets so ugly: neither side can understand why their opponents oppose what self-evidently should be done to solve our problems, so both sides ascribe evil motives to the other. But the financial crisis has exposed this simplistic view of the world for what it is. Nobody can plausibly deny any more that modern societies are bafflingly complex and the solutions to modern problems difficult to discover. So the policies that seem to voters or regulators to be so obviously needed may turn out to be disastrous nostrums—unless regulators or citizens are infallible.

That surely would be magical. But there is no more magic to politics than there is to capitalism. The question is how best to guard against human frailties: by putting all our eggs in one politically decided basket? Or by hedging our bets by setting fallible ideas into competition with each other?

Juvenal Delinquent,

Just saw a Georgia National Guard commercial. Some kid saying Country, Community, Family! Now go through boot camp and get sent to Afghanistan. WTF, can you say Bizzaro world. And it aint no meat grinder, just like in the places they occupy they are doing better than the locals at least the ones of similar age.

Slumdog wrote:

If his restaurant closes, he gets free rent to "earn back" his down, and then he's gone. He has no vested interest in that house except that he's paying about the same as when he was renting, and now he's a homeowner, with a hope that inflation will lift him into riches. This man is below Alt-A and above sub-prime.

Why would he not do it......fewer and fewer people, corporations and even countries are replaying what they owe....

fewer and fewer people, corporations and even countries are replaying what they owe....

D.I.Y. Jubilee

nova
huh? why?
but you're welcome

Juvenal Delinquent wrote:

D.I.Y. Jubilee

The day might come when I'll be pissed I missed my shot at defaulting on a big debt.

Too big to jail?

HomeGnome wrote:

Too big to jail?

i like it ......The big fish always get away....

The powers that be are so afraid of people saying sayanora, that the richest amongst us that choose to do so, are labeled by the maim stream media as:

"Ruthless Defaulters"

t r orwell wrote:

Maybe get your non-recourse TALF money loans for all your assets at peak 2007 prices, then cherry pick and sell your toxic assets thru TARP.

BINGO. The Federal reserve bought toxic residential MBS by giant boatloads, next CMBS which is even worse. Those rents and occupancy rates are bad now and will be getting worse next year. A report I read this morning is another 20% decline next year but, I forget where, so don't take it too seriously. It was by a respected source though.

CMBS is what will hit the small banks and regionals in a major way. They cannot compete with the majors who get 0% loans, basically debt forgiveness from the fed and earn interest to boot on the funds not used an on that balance sheet.

I'm also worried about consolidation in big Pharma. I don't see any red flags being raised for interest conflicts or monopolistic holding companies. They are seeking deals with India and other nations now too for generic mfg of pharmaceuticals. A lot of that is going on anyway, but it appears they are seeking to outsource even more than they have. Pharma plant closings/cutbacks are in the news a lot today.

And Cinco-X: Just as in the capital markets and in federal regulations, those who are charged with looking out for the public interest were hollowed out without enough staff at the FDA and elsewhere. There is absolutely no way to monitor for quality assurance in closed countries or with large language barriers. The companies themselves abandoned QA/oversight on their own products in that ever increasing game of those better quarterly statements. Its sick, this patient needs to die before it gets better.

......while waiting for a new thread..............ever notice how aged Hillary Clinton is starting to look? The job doesn't seem to be agreeing with her.

Can you think of 'Ruthless' in any good connotation?

totally off topic.
has anyone ever got an error 403? i was trying to get my newspapers together(i get delete happy sometime) and got that error on a paki paper, Frontier post,which covers area close to afghan border.
error 403 mean access is forbidden. it also says that you may have to log on,.
oh yeah almost forgot

There is an alternative to large college loans in the US its called the military. With the new GI bill you get 4 years free for yourself or your nominee at a college of your choice. (IMHO an excellent recruitment tool, and of course a throw back to the thanks the country gave the WWII generation for serving). In addition there are ROTC scholarships as well. If you stay in you will likeley get an advanced degree as part payment for service. There are risks in joining but there are the rewards as well.

As to assessments is there not an appeal process? If there is and you have evidence go to appeal your value.

On the education point a part of the whole housing run up was to get in a "good " school district. I think we should move to state wide school districts. I live in a county of 40,000 that has 5 school districts. But proposing consolidation is the combination hornets nest, bin of snakes of politics.

Please vote in my Poll