patrick.net

Thus far he’s averted (a) the total meltdown in equity markets (b) the appearance of some semblance of “normality” in our credit markets and (c) the poise of someone that at least half expected this debacle.

It is quite wise of them to dampen the downward movement of the credit cycle early on. I started to like Benover.

Peter P,

They had some analyst (from the Rose City) on yesterday calling for an immediate reduction in BOTH the discount AND over-night rates along with raising the ceiling for Fannie and Freddie, a bump in jumbo as well as running the presses 24/7!

Uh... anything ELSE with that?

If that's even remotely typical of the feedback (pressure) BB's under... well then I think he's doing fine given the circumstances.

RandyH said:
Discount window lending is *not* inflationary unless the Fed keeps renewing those loans indefinitely.

Agreed - however the article also said the banks didn't actually need the funds but were doing so to 'help' by adding money to the system - which is a deviation from the intended use of the discount window as I understood it.

SP

SP,

I think by "Help" they mean "give money to people trying to withdraw it from their accounts."

Methinks there is a mini-run on the banks.

There is more than a mini run on banks. This is the real deal: a full fledged run on the banks. It's just happening for the first time in the post-depressionary modern US banking system on more than a tiny, neighborhood scale. So far the system is handling fairly well with the help of the Fed's actions.

But have no illusion, the flows of paper-to-paper cash transactions are staggering. People are pulling bonds for money markets, money markets for treasuries, long treasuries for short treasuries, etc. And people with a lot of $ at a single bank are pulling that as fast as they can and wiring it to the majors.

I'm guilty of this. What I had left in bonds and more aggressive paper is all in Vanguard or BofA now, in simple money market instruments. Even within Vanguard I went bonds-to-cash.

And things are that much worse for the in-trouble banks. They're effectively experiencing total withdrawals of demand deposits. I'd call this a full fledged bank run.

This "run on the banks" is yet another interesting episode in the whole credit/housing bubble saga. We must thank the Fed this time - at least for the time being things are holding OK. Since the run-on-the-bank is rooted in fear, it's important for the banks/Fed to give appearance of calm.

I wouldn't say I saw this coming. But I wasn't touching bonds for quite some time now, mainly due to ridiculously low yields. It was either money market or stocks for me, and I don't see that changing. I am thinking of moving from Vanguard Prime MM to their Treasury MM, although not sure if it's really needed. I also have some in Tax Free CA Money Market. Trying to find out if that will have any problems.

Well I noticed an interesting thing with BofA online banking.

One of my other MM accounts had a little bit over the FDIC limit in it (at countrywide!! eek!) so I transferred 10k from CFC to BOFA account online from BOFA transfer tool. It appears they may have changed it to only allow transfers every 4 business days (10k per day). It USED to let me to 10k per day, in fact, there is an error message saying it only lets you do 10k per day but 4 days in a row I get that message! and my last transfer was 8/17 (still pending!) so its more like 10k per week is the maximum. There really is a run.

It 'appears' BOFA or CFC has slowed down my online transfer of a measley 10k from CFC to BOFA. And not only that but the option to transfer same day is greyed out (on bofa online banking ) and I can only choose '3 business days' option on the 'outside of bank' transfer option at BofA. In the past I zipped funds back and forth between these two accounts rapidly no problems, so everything is setup correctly....

I'm just making sure all accounts everywhere are under 100k. I may have to actually walk into a bank to withdraw funds, this is a hassle.

Funny thing....BofA just put $2 billion equity into Countrywide late today. Maybe your money didn't travel as far as you thought.

When I sold my house in San Jose last year, I opened 4 MM accounts at local banks/credit unions. At close of escrow the funds were electronically transferred in equal amounts into said MM accounts. My friends all teased me about being so concerned with the FDIC limits: "Banks never fold these days." Sort of like "real estate ALWAYS goes up."

They aren't laughing at me any more.

I never trust local banks and credit unions. My money is safer with the biggest, baddest, and meanest banksters.

RandyH said: And people with a lot of $ at a single bank are pulling that as fast as they can and wiring it to the majors.

What do you mean by majors? Let us say hypothetically, despite spreading things around a bit, I have in excess of the FDIC limit in a couple of places. What would you consider a 'major', something like BofA? At the moment, I don't feel comfortable handing my money to merrill lynch to manage either.

SP

It ‘appears’ BOFA or CFC has slowed down my online transfer of a measley 10k from CFC to BOFA.

Just go to the branch and ask for a wire transfer!

Peter P,

When I said "local" I meant fairly large establishments, such as Zion's Bank and State Farm Bank, that had local B&M offices. I understand that the "3rd national bank of Nampa" may be a little more risky.

There is a lot of talk about how the sub-prime mortgage industry is wreaking havoc on the global economy. I'll have to admit that I'm not econo-geeky enough to understand how the T-Bonds are connected to the LIBOR-bone, and the LIBOR-bone is connected to the Yeild Curve-bone, or any of the other tangled, intricate web of how the lending industry is interrelated. But I do get that when 20% of the buyers are no longer able to obtain loans, it's a serious impact on the supply and demand equation.

But my view is quite myopic, focusing on how the mortgage lending industry is going to affect the housing industry and most specifically the real estate investor. I do, however, have an interest in how the US and Global economy are doing, and when I try to get a handle on it, I have to really concentrate for even a glimpse of understanding.

Thank God for Ben Stein. If it weren't for him, where would Matthew Broderick be today? Without Ben, I'd completely forget about something-d-o-o economics (as if I really ever understood it... something in the back of my head is telling me that it might be possible that the voo-doo economics might be a player in today's fiasco.)

Really, though, I do appreciate Ben's perspective on economics. In his most recent article to date, entitled "'Stupid' investors, rejoice!", he explains how we all need to take a chill-pill and realize that this is just another case of the masses overreacting to a short term issue. In the long run, things are fine, the economy is fine, and if we just sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride, we'll do okay.

One of the paragraphs that intrigued me most was this:

"The subprime mortgage world is about 15% of all mortgages, or $1.5 trillion worth, very roughly. About 10%--approximately $150 billion--is in arrears. Of that, something like half is in default and will likely be seized in foreclosure and sold. That comes to about $75 billion. Roughly half to two-thirds of that will be realized on liquidation, leaving a loss of maybe $37 billion. Not chump change by any means--but one-thirtieth, more or less, of what has been knocked off the stock market."

I'm still concerned with the US economy and how it will fare in the next few decades. In this article, Ben says the following:

"The economy has not had one real depression since 1941, a span of an amazing 66 years. In the roughly 60 rolling-ten-year periods since the end of World War II, the S&P 500's total return has exceeded the return on "risk-free" Treasury long-term bonds in all but four ten-year periods--the ones ending in 1974, 1977, 1978, and 2002. The first three of these were times of seriously flawed monetary policy that allowed stagflation, and the last one was on the heels of the tech crash and the worst peacetime terrorist attack in the history of the Western world."

and he says:

"...the consumer is always about to stop buying and never quite does. Maybe someone in his bowling club has told him there has only been one year since 1959 when consumer spending fell--and that was barely, in 1980. Somehow, if the consumer could keep spending after the bursting of the tech bubble wiped out $7 trillion or so of wealth, maybe the consumer can keep spending even if the subprime "mess" wipes out roughly half of 1% of that tech-bubble loss and the stock market has a fit. And maybe he knows that, even if there is a recession, recessions rarely last more than two quarters, and the economy and the stock market revive mightily after that--and that buying stocks in a recession is a good idea, not a bad idea."

My concern with this kind of thinking is that it is based, for the most part, on a time when national economies were much more isoloated. The economy is becoming much more global, and there are many more economies to consider, with China and India really starting to be a major factor. I understand his points above, but I do have a concern that we really don't know how things will play out now that the US isn't nearly in control of our economy as we used to be. Rather, we used to be a totally dominating influence, and now we're seeing parity with many other economies, and I'm not too sure anyone knows how this will affect how things will go.

That said while I would love a chance to Win Ben Stein's Money, when it comes to economics, he is the man. And his outlook is bright, which is refreshing to hear. I'd recommend you read the entire article on CNN, which can be found HERE.

The sf.gov website used to have a lot of information up about properties, I used it when a friend was looking for a house about 4 or 5 years ago. The site is still up, with the taxes per year and parcel number for each address, but they took down the deed holders' names.

When I said “local” I meant fairly large establishments, such as Zion’s Bank and State Farm Bank, that had local B&M offices. I understand that the “3rd national bank of Nampa” may be a little more risky.

Is there any reason why one should go to a local bank as opposed to a bankster bank that cannot be let fail?

HiThere,

What concerns me about the future of the US economy is that for the American middle class real income has declined for 5 straight years. The upper class is fine, but I fear that the middle is increasingly being pushed downward economically while at the same time living an aspirationally driven lifestyle financed by easy credit. The whole subprime mess to me seems to be partially a result of this aspirational/luxury lifestyle change.

Subprimes may have been a fairly small part of the mortgage market, but with this change in zeitgeist the demand in the secondary market for jumbo mortgages has dried up, which will certainly have some effect on the RE market in the bubble states.

BOFA did not invest, they LENT $2B to CFC at 7.25%.

The loan it is convertible to common stock (later) at $18.
It is not an "investment" until it is converted to stock, rather
than owed to BofA.

That is 2B/18=111M shares or dilution of 17% when the time comes,
and the stock reacted by jumping $4+ to $26? Weird.

Is it just me or do HiThere and TOS share the same affinity for Ben Stein?

SFWoman,

While I'm sure the upper class will fare better I'd read Romney had a HUGE HF loss. Sure, he can weather it better than most but we may find this meltdown affects the wealthy more than previous downturns.

Like Barbara Ehrenreich (Nickel'd and Dimed) says, "Stick it to the super wealthy! Don't pay your mortgage (and don't move out!)"

DinOR,

I think there will be a lot of HF problems. The economic upperclass has done EXTRORDINARILY well for the past 5 or 6 years, however, while the middle has really fallen behind. The lowest economic class actually made a tiny bit of progress.

Skibum, Accredited Home Lenders has stopped lending only to the US. Time to buy abroad?

I've been in Europe for a while now, enjoying the awesome spending power of the Euro and British Pound (NOT).

Can't get a mortgage, even if I wanted to buy an overpriced home in BA, can't get any value for my US dollars abroad, and now the Fed is moving toward lowering the Prime rate.

Back to the topic... I was amazed at the number of foreign looking names I found on Property Shark. That doesn't necessarily mean they are foreign owners, but I suspect that is the case.

With the falling US dollar, I would expect an even greater influx of foreigners buying up BA properties. Not that there's anything wrong with that, just wondering where I can put my money.

Guess I'm moving to Mexico? Should be plenty of fixer uppers in the Cancun area.

FYI, tonight's mega millions is up to 200 million pesos, er dollars.

With the falling US dollar, I would expect an even greater influx of foreigners buying up BA properties. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, just wondering where I can put my money.

Asian currencies have not appreciated too much against the Peso yet.

The Bay Area is too boring for European. Get real, people. The Bay Area is very nice (for those who are can afford only one "primary" residence) but rich Europeans have seen the world.

>. Discount window lending is *not* inflationary unless the Fed keeps renewing those loans indefinitely. That’s actually the intent of the discount window — most loans are 1-3 days in duration.

FED is willing to do 30 day loan indefinitely. Correct me if I am wrong ...

Wilbur Ross said this:

I recently overheard two men arguing about who was better off. One boasted about his new car, the other about a plasma TV and so on, until one proclaimed, "I am better off because I owe more than you are worth." The second man conceded defeat. This anecdote summarizes the mortgage bubble. Americans spent more than they earned in 2005 and 2006 and borrowed the difference. The federal government did the same. Everyone secretly feared this was unsound but wanted immediate gratification, so there was applause for talking heads who said global liquidity would make these borrowings safe. Alan Greenspan went so far as to suggest that people take out adjustable-rate mortgages.

Is there any reason why one should go to a local bank as opposed to a bankster bank that cannot be let fail?

Bankster banks (e.g. BofA) pay around 2% on MM accounts: the ones I chose pay over 5%.

Bankster banks (e.g. BofA) pay around 2% on MM accounts: the ones I chose pay over 5%.

Fidelity has MM funds that are paying over 5%.

BTW, IIRC MM funds are investment products and they are not guaranteed against losses.

Rich Europeans may have seen the world, but they've seen mostly rain this summer. Northern Europe has been soaked. I came back looking like a prune this year. So glad to be back in the sun.

If I were a rich European, particularly in the North, I'd be seriously considering a nice house on the sunny West Coast of CA. The further away from Greenland one can get, the better off. (Greenland has about 8% of the world's glaciers, all melting right now, and falling on London and Amsterdam)

But it's not likely most Europeans will want to put up with the likes of Bush.
I think they'd rather drown.

Hi Everyone; been a while since I've been on here. Has anyone seen this "Homeowners and Bank Protection Act of 2007". ?

The Lyndon LaRouche committee is trying to get congress to pass this insane bill. Since I haven't been here in a while, I don't know if you've had any discussion on it; if not, I think this could really use a thread of it's own.

If I were a rich European, particularly in the North, I’d be seriously considering a nice house on the sunny West Coast of CA.

That would probably mean Santa Barbara... or perhaps Newport Beach...

The best parts of the Bay Area rain a lot.

The Bay Area is attractive only to those who think humans live to work... and that Monta Vista is the Holy Grail of success.

Yeah, I saw that Allah, and also Chuck Schumer's effort to bail out mortgage owners.

http://www.senate.gov/~schumer/

It's a crime. Let the free market work, dammit. If the economy implodes because Americans can't make their mortgage payments, so be it. No amount of money in the US coffers is going to save us anyway. We need China for that. We've made our bed, and now we have lie in it.

Or emmigrate.

The number of "insane" legislative initiatives across the political spectrum of the US w.r.t. mortgage bailouts is leaning me toward that latter option (among other factors).

I would say yes to a new thread on crazy bills to 'help' the poor mortgage owners. I'd also say, write your representatives.

SP

What do you mean by majors? Let us say hypothetically, despite spreading things around a bit, I have in excess of the FDIC limit in a couple of places. What would you consider a ‘major’, something like BofA? At the moment, I don’t feel comfortable handing my money to merrill lynch to manage either.

Money markets at large, national banks will not be allowed to fail. I doubt money markets at large brokers will either. The consequences of even a tiny failure in this regard results in the following news report:

"Mary Smith went into her local Wells Fargo to tap into her savings account to help pay her rent for the month. She lost her job, like hundreds of thousands of others, due to the current recession. But when the teller told her she would only get $80 for every $100 she deposited, and for the rest she'd have to fill out a form to submit to the government, she began to cry uncontrollably."

"Like millions of other hard working Americans, Mary found out that up to 20% of her money was simply 'gone'. And, though the government guarantees this money through FDIC insurance, Mary will be unable to pay her rent in the coming months unless someone gives her money back quickly."

This report would be followed by scattered reports of massive lines at closed bank doors, sporadic violence, and appeals for calm.

Instead the government will just make sure that money market funds are redeemable. It hasn't been long enough since the Great Depression yet for the government to let the banks *be perceived* as failing. Not yet anyway. Maybe in 20-30 years, but not today.

If I were rich, I would live in...

Spring: Sedona
Summer: Côte d'Azur or British Columbia
Autumn: New England
Winter: Florida, Hawaii, or Gold Coast

I hear ya Peter P. It takes only a few days in Europe to realize how much we work to live here in the good ole US of A.

Not yet anyway. Maybe in 20-30 years, but not today.

So long as the Boomers are alive and voting, the electronic printing press is going to run 24/7.

You really shouldn't be spending Winters in Florida if you want to avoid the Boomers. Plus, the bugs are still as big as your head in Winter as they are any other time of the year. I grew up there and still appreciate a healthy respect for the Palmetto bug.

Go for Hawaii, where you will encounter only one of those pests.

I am afraid of bugs. :(

Me too, especially big ones that FLY! Oh the horrors...

OK, no Florida... back to the good old Bay Area. :)

About Europeans coming to America, I think they really did between 1990 and 1995. And not a few of them bought vacation homes, though I don't think many kept them for more than a few years.

Were there Asians aplenty in the BA at that time?