Patrick.net

^

By 0   Follow   Mon, 6 Sep 2010, 12:10pm   10,790 views   109 comments
Watch (0)   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike  

-

Most Liked Comments

1. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,646 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

   1   2:03pm Tue 7 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   CrazyMan says That’s like saying there’s been absolutely no inflation. Also, 3K for a new computer? Really? You got ripped Gamer systems are a tad more expensive than your average office desktop. It's my hidden vice.

2. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,646 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

   2   12:30am Thu 9 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   thomas.wong1986 says ptiemann says thomas.wong as always has an extremely distorted view to justify his positions. Nobody would call a $300 netbook a ‘top of the line’ machine. I was about to buy a netbook past Monday and most cost around $350. They are the opposite of ‘top-of-the-line’. No i dont expect a former SV Engineer to understand once a consumer purchases a netbook, they forgo buying a “top of the line”, opportunity cost, forces the competing producer to lower their cost in kind. Under the hood the netbooks have the same components, but cheaper labor from Taiwan. I seen this played out several times over for the past 25 years. This has absolutely nothing to do with what you said. Please explain how a top of the line Intel CPU, which I purchased for $1000, is "made cheaper" from Taiwan.

3. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,646 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

   3   7:55am Thu 9 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   PolishKnight says Housing prices weren’t supposed to fall, they were supposed to climb like a rockET… forever and at all times. Prices certainly don't rise forever but they don't fall forever either. This bear market in real estate has already exceeded every prior one in both magnitude and duration. Yet some of you are predicting further declines of 5 years and 50%. This cannot and will not happen. Iwog, if there is a single thing that ought to push any remaining leftists on this blog off of utopian marxism is the fact that the government has blown trillions of dollars just to temporarily prop up the housing market and create this rental price increase side effect. This isn't true. Trillions of dollars went to prop up the banks and keep interest rates low, but most real estate investors now are paying cash. The reason the banks needed to be propped up is deregulation by Republicans and the total absolute failure of Republican administrations to enforce antitrust laws on the books created banks that were too big to fail and would have taken the entire economy with them had they crashed. The utopian "Marxism" was FDR's New Deal which kept banks sound for 40 years. Reagan destroyed the Savings and Loans via deregulation while Clinton and congressional Republicans almost destroyed the banks. Anyway NONE OF THIS addresses the fact that reality is not following the popular narrative of this board. First the stock market defied all the predictions of doom and gloom. Then the real estate market stopped dropping and actually gained in most areas. Finally rents are going up. Isn't it about time for a major re-evaluation?

4. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,646 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

   4   3:18pm Thu 9 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   PolishKnight says The New Deal kept the country in a great depression for a decade until FDR… got us into a war! Yeah! Here’s to the great solution of blowing money on wars and getting people killed! All praise warmongers! Oh, and then FDR went and gave away Eastern Europe to a bigger butcher than Hitler, his “ally” and f-buddy Josef Stalin because FDR LIED to the American people about his illness. Give me a reason why this paragraph shouldn't put you in the lunatic file. I'm going to show you a relative graph of the GDP during the Great Depression. I want you to point out on the chart exactly where FDR "kept the country in a great depression". Lets start with this one single point then we can move on to others.

5. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,646 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

   5   3:20pm Thu 9 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   PolishKnight says Space requirements. Do you REALLY want more? Seriously though, I love how the real estate bubble is blamed on “deregulation” as defined by evil banks doing what the government told them to do. It’s doublespeak. I remember 5 years ago when these same people were chuckling about all their “preferential treatment” loans and how the “trashy, but overprivileged” conservatives were “missing out” on the real estate boom and special loans. Tee hee. Yeah, that really worked out well for them… Not one single loan written in the United States during the real estate boom was forced on the banks. Every penny was voluntary.

6. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,646 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

   6   8:54am Fri 10 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   PolishKnight says The graph is rather exaggerated compared to others I saw. I notice no URL or specific references. I concur that GDP did increase just as federal tax revenues, for example, did after Ronald Reagan cut taxes, eh? :-) But that’s not the main point. Unemployment remained at 15% for the duration of the 1930’s and only then went down when he started shipping off young men to their deaths. A depression isn't measured by unemployment, a depression is measured by GDP. GDP is the economic activity within a country. Unemployment is how effective the society is in distributing wealth creation to the public. That being said, YOU made the argument that FDR extended the Great Depression so I posted a chart of the GDP. It doesn't look like FDR extended anything. It looks like FDR went to work digging us out of the depression the moment he took office. Since you brought up unemployment, I'll point out that unemployment dropped every single year FDR was in office save one. 1937 is the year FDR decided to listen to fiscal conservatives and balance the budget. It was a mistake obviously, just like it would be a mistake today for Obama to listen to fiscal conservatives and reign in federal spending.

7. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,646 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

   7   8:57am Fri 10 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   Since you didn't like my GDP graph, here's another one. Please point out on the graph where FDR extended the Great Depression. Most people would call this a V shaped recovery. I wonder why you don't?

8. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,646 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

   8   12:05pm Mon 13 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   PolishKnight says MarkInSF, these “mortgage companies” are not banks. The banks ordered to buy the bad securities were ordered to do so for political reasons based upon race and gender. Perhaps the great irony of leftism is that the groups that suffer the most tend to be their constituencies. After all, if their special interest groups ever were to become wealthy or succesful, then they wouldn’t need socialist preferential treatment anymore. Can you either prove your assertion or admit you're wrong? I'm getting tired of seeing this same nonsense posted again and again and again. I think it's very sad that you refuse to prove it either way (even to yourself) and will continue being a mouthpiece for false propaganda. Do some research. If you find a single case where a bank was forced to make a loan, post it here. Otherwise PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE grow a little bit and learn the truth.

9. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,646 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

   9   7:18pm Tue 14 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   PolishKnight says Somehow… I don’t believe you. I don’t think you’re really very sad that you think I “refuse” to prove you wrong and that this means you’re right. It’s probably not a wild guess that you treasure the idea that you’re Right and I’m Wrong and that this notion is congruous with a notion of intellectual and personal superiority. I couldn't care less if you proved me wrong or not. I very much want you to prove it to yourself, that way you'll stop spreading lies. You have a right to your opinions. The trouble with you however is that you want the right to your own facts as well.

10. PolishKnight Follow Befriend (1) 408 comments Reston, VA

    10   6:47am Wed 15 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   IWOG, you don't hold opinions. You like to hold "facts." Or holy truth. If you went to church, maybe you'd be more tolerant outside of it.

11. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,646 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    11   7:19am Wed 15 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   PolishKnight says IWOG, you don’t hold opinions. You like to hold “facts.” Or holy truth. If you went to church, maybe you’d be more tolerant outside of it. The CRA has never forced a single institution to make a loan since its inception. Furthermore CRA banks actually wrote fewer toxic loans than non-CRA banks did. If you were honest, you'd confirm these facts.

12. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,646 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    12   7:49am Wed 15 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   PolishKnight says “The CRA has never forced a single institution to make a loan since its inception. Furthermore CRA banks actually wrote fewer toxic loans than non-CRA banks did. If you were honest, you’d confirm these facts.” Perhaps the source of your frustration is that your claimed facts don’t, by themselves, make them facts. For example, let’s define your “facts”: How many banks are “CRA”? How many are not? What percentage of bad loans are CRA and not? How many CRA banks exist compared to nonCRA banks? What IS a CRA bank? Why is it a failure of my “honesty” for you to make unsupported claims? You sure don’t seem in a rush to confirm where my “facts” are right. Amazing. You're not going to believe a word I say on the subject which is why I want YOU to research it for yourself and discover how silly your beliefs are. You know what's really odd about this? YOU said that FDR prolonged the Great Depression without one shred of support. Not only did you make this unsupported claim, when I posted FACTS AND EVIDENCE to the contrary, you ran away from the conversation. THEN you came up with "The banks ordered to buy the bad securities were ordered to do so for political reasons based upon race and gender." As before it was a completely unsubstantiated claim lacking any support whatsoever. So I guess my question is why you demand all kinds of evidence from me when you're totally 100% incapable of providing any evidence for anything you've said in this entire thread? Doesn't make a lot of sense does it.

13. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,646 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    13   7:52am Wed 15 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   http://www.occ.treas.gov/ftp/release/2008-136.htm Comptroller of the Currency John C. Dugan said he categorically disagrees with suggestions that the Community Reinvestment Act is partly responsible for the ongoing credit crisis. “CRA is not the culprit behind the subprime mortgage lending abuses, or the broader credit quality issues in the marketplace,” Mr. Dugan said in a speech to the Enterprise Annual Network Conference. “Indeed, the lenders most prominently associated with subprime mortgage lending abuses and high rates of foreclosure are lenders not subject to CRA,” he added. “A recent study of 2006 Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data showed that banks subject to CRA and their affiliates originated or purchased only six percent of the reported high cost loans made to lower-income borrowers within their CRA assessment areas.”

14. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,646 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    14   7:56am Wed 15 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   http://www.traigerlaw.com/publications/traiger_hinckley_llp_cra_foreclosure_study_1-7-08.pdf Indications that the CRA Deterred Irresponsible Lending in the 15 Most Populous U.S. Metropolitan Areas Summary Conclusions Our study concludes that CRA Banks were substantially less likely than other lenders to make the kinds of risky home purchase loans that helped fuel the foreclosure crisis. Specifically, our analysis shows that: (1) CRA Banks were significantly less likely than other lenders to make a high cost loan; (2) The average APR on high cost loans originated by CRA Banks was appreciably lower than the average APR on high cost loans originated by other lenders; (3) CRA Banks were more than twice as likely as other lenders to retain originated loans in their portfolio; and (4) Foreclosure rates were lower in MSAs with greater concentrations of bank branches.

15. iwog Follow Befriend (48) 274 threads 12,646 comments 47 male Lafayette, CA Premium

    15   8:40am Wed 15 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like (1)   Dislike   Protected   lol......you're really REALLY late!!!! All the evidence you need is right above your post. I basically preempted EVERYTHING you said. Now please present your case. You think CRA is to blame? Prove it. I presented my case, so where is your case? We're all waiting.

16. vain Follow Befriend (2) 68 threads 876 comments

    16   12:53pm Mon 6 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   I'm thinking the landlords need to net $X to avoid defaulting. Surely if rents lower, there will be a whole new surge of distressed properties.

17. bubblesitter Follow Befriend (5) 10 threads 2,329 comments

    17   1:19pm Mon 6 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Some are investors and need certain $ to cover their mortgage. But the question is do they have people ready to pay high rent they are asking? That's not a hard question at all.

18. Patrick Follow Befriend (54) 5,235 threads 6,171 comments 46 male Menlo Park, CA Premium

    18   2:56pm Mon 6 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   Yes, I checked my Property Finder graphs, and it does look like rents in the city of SF have increased recently. I'm not sure how that can work when unemployment is still pretty high. Could be a mix change, where more expensive places are coming on the market, skewing the average.

19. Patrick Follow Befriend (54) 5,235 threads 6,171 comments 46 male Menlo Park, CA Premium

    19   2:57pm Mon 6 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Protected   Oops, didn't upload the right graph from my Property Finder at first. Here it is:

20. bubblesitter Follow Befriend (5) 10 threads 2,329 comments

    20   3:06pm Mon 6 Sep 2010   Share   Quote   Permalink   Like   Dislike   Patrick says Yes, I checked my Property Finder graphs, and it does look like rents in the city of SF have increased recently. I’m not sure how that can work when unemployment is still pretty high. Could be a mix change, where more expensive places are coming on the market, skewing the average. Well Iwog and Nomo will get a kick out of this.