- On 18 Jun 2013
in
Separating the Fluff from the Fundamentals,
tatupu70 said:
"doesn't", professor in name only.
most of the data in that report don't look too bad:
Actually both forms are considered acceptable now. It seems that data is both singular and plural.
http://gpuss.co.uk/english_usage/data_plural_singular.htm
http://www.forbes.com/sites/naomirobbins/2012/07/25/is-the-word-data-singular-or-plural/
- On 14 Jun 2013
in
NSA's PRISM: Direct Access to ISPs, no warrant or FISA needed,
tatupu70 said:
But this almost presupposes some compelling level of effectiveness on behalf of the ever-encroaching security complex.
Yes it does--you are correct.
It's just the cartoon version of what you proffered.
Yep--and I think we have too many cartoonish versions in debates these days and not enough reality
- On 14 Jun 2013
in
In a Shift, Interest Rates Are Rising,
tatupu70 said:
OK--You got me curious enough to repeat your experiment. I chose the data from the following places:
Housing prices:
http://www.census.gov/const/uspricemon.pdfMortgage rates:
http://www.freddiemac.com/pmms/pmms30.htmI put all the data into Excel and plotted monthly percentage change in housing prices vs. interest rates. I got an r squared value of .0003. To me that indicates basically no correlation between nominal housing prices and interest rates.
As would be expected with that r squared value, it looks like a scatter chart.
- On 14 Jun 2013
in
In a Shift, Interest Rates Are Rising,
tatupu70 said:
The last sentence is a great example of the BS that industry economists shovel out on a daily basis. The key word here is "strong." First of all, just because there isn't a strong correlation doesn't mean that there is no correlation. Second, by my calculation using median home prices, CPI-U-LA, median incomes and Freddie Mac's mortgage rates since 1971, I get the following correlations in Excel which meet the strong correlation definition of Pearson's r.
price to personal income: +0.98 (perfect correlation)
price to mortgage rate: -0.59 (strong negative correlation)
price to inflation rate: -0.52 (strong negative correlation)Could you show your data? Did you use nominal housing prices?
- On 14 Jun 2013
in
NSA's PRISM: Direct Access to ISPs, no warrant or FISA needed,
tatupu70 said:
This borders on the actuarial. So what if we invert the weights in your example? Is it useless if only 10% are prevented and 90% are not? We then get into the tedious process of teasing apart what percentages delimit acceptable effectiveness from ineffectiveness.
I don't know--it's a question we have to ask as a society. How much freedom will we trade to save lives?
Don't argue that cutting off your feet is not effective at relieving athlete's foot. If you want to say that the trade-offs are not one you would choose to make, you can, and you have a strong case; but it's not ineffective!
The hyperbole doesn't really help the debate. That was my main point originally.
- On 14 Jun 2013
in
House Prices are Not Affordable,
tatupu70 said:
no one wants to admit we are still "more than 15 percent higher than their long-term trend"... they want to ignore all past historical price trends.
And Detroit is 50% under its long term trend. Must be a huge buying opportunity, right Thomas?
- On 12 Jun 2013
in
Latest Insanity in Palo Alto Housing Market,
tatupu70 said:
So a wage/price spiral up? Not likely.
I agree for the short term. But over the next 30 years? Hard to say.
- On 12 Jun 2013
in
Latest Insanity in Palo Alto Housing Market,
tatupu70 said:
If inflation blew up, rents would not rise, unless incomes rose
I think the point is that incomes will rise too.
- On 11 Jun 2013
in
NSA's PRISM: Direct Access to ISPs, no warrant or FISA needed,
tatupu70 said:
Source please-where did you get your stats from?
I made them up. It was a thought exercise to show the fallacy.
- On 11 Jun 2013
in
Real Unemployment Rate again,
tatupu70 said:
What about all the other countries where the labor participation rate seems steady or increasing? Plenty of them are in Europe, but what about Australia and Canada where the labor participation rate is steady?
I don't know. Do they have similar age demographics like the US does?
- On 11 Jun 2013
in
Real Unemployment Rate again,
tatupu70 said:
The Chicago Fed says less than half the record low labor force participation rate is due to retiring boomers. Slightly more than half is due to the lousy economy.
that sounds about right.
- On 11 Jun 2013
in
Real Unemployment Rate again,
tatupu70 said:
So that does not explain the unemployment rate now?
Like I said in my previous post--it explains part of it, IMO
- On 11 Jun 2013
in
Real Unemployment Rate again,
tatupu70 said:
The very oldest baby boomers are 67 the bulk are in their mid to late 50s. Your assertion seems unlikely, can you produce some numbers that back that up?
I agree that boomers retiring only explains a portion of the decrease, but it's not surprising that the participation rate will continue to decline for the next 15 years.
- On 11 Jun 2013
in
Real Unemployment Rate again,
tatupu70 said:
If that were the case, why is the labor participation rate in Germany going up?
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.TLF.CACT.ZSSeems to be holding steady in a lot of other countries too. Did they not have a baby boom as well? I'm thinking that they did.
Their peak population is between 40-55 as far as I can tell. Their mini-boom is a decade behind ours--probably because so many of their men died in the war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Germany#Demographic_statistics_and_policies
- On 11 Jun 2013
in
NSA's PRISM: Direct Access to ISPs, no warrant or FISA needed,
tatupu70 said:
Enjoy Your Hope and Change says
Another proof of it's uselessness: all this spying and snooping didn't prevent the bombing.
That's poor logic. I'm not defending anything, mind you, but if 90% of terrorist attacks are prevented and 10% are not, it's not useless.
You can argue the security vs. freedom trade-off is not one you would choose to make. And you have a strong case. But don't argue that it's useless--you'll lose that one.
- On 11 Jun 2013
in
Real Unemployment Rate again,
tatupu70 said:
And there are also job numbers that make sense in the context of a baby boom population beginning to retire.
- On 10 Jun 2013
in
Romney 52%, Obama 45%,
tatupu70 said:
It's no sin to think that housing prices should follow the fundamentals
What does this thread have to do with housing prices?
- On 10 Jun 2013
in
New warning sign that "unlimited" stimulus may not succeed,
tatupu70 said:
That's why I don't get the 99 percenters gripe. That's like bitching because the Pastor of the church drives a Cadillac.
I don't think you understand the problem then...
- On 10 Jun 2013
in
1.7 million borrowers are seriously delinquent on government-backed loans,
tatupu70 said:
I don't know the true figures but an educated guess would put a national average
of higher than 70 percent! That is not demand. That is speculation.How are you coming up with a figure of 70% That seems ridiculously high to me.
- On 10 Jun 2013
in
Best Explanation on the Fake Housing Market Recovery Ive Seen,
tatupu70 said:
Let me run a simulation and get back to you....
I'll save you the trouble. Your explanation is BS.
- On 10 Jun 2013
in
Dont Read This if You Thought the Economy Was Improving,
tatupu70 said:
That's the problem with the CPI is that not all things especially common
purchases like oil, energy, and etc and some of the things listed in the article
are not really accounted for.What makes you think they aren't accounted for?
- On 10 Jun 2013
in
Best Explanation on the Fake Housing Market Recovery Ive Seen,
tatupu70 said:
It's a typo. I launched the pinky right at the apostrophe, but arthritis
coupled with lack of inter-tendon fluid forced the digit to come up short. The
correct commands were issued to the limb.....lol--so you meant to type an 're, but the limb came up short and you just typed an "r"? So, you came up short when you typed the apostrophe? What happened to the "e"? Wouldn't you have youre if you just came up short on the apostrophe?
- On 9 Jun 2013
in
Dont Read This if You Thought the Economy Was Improving,
tatupu70 said:
But, the work force in the 55+ age bracket is the highest its ever been... they can't afford to retire....
Not sure that is the right measure. Of course the absolute number is high--there are just a crapload of people in the baby boom generation.
You need to find the number of retired people and add them back into the workforce calculations and see if that accounts for the lower participation rates. I don't have the number so I'm not sure if it does or not. I suspect that retirees are only a part of the issue and that there are a decent number of people who have stopped looking....
- On 8 Jun 2013
in
Mortgage Applications Decrease as Rates Jump in Latest MBA Weekly Survey,
tatupu70 said:
You're right--my mistake
- On 8 Jun 2013
in
Mortgage Applications Decrease as Rates Jump in Latest MBA Weekly Survey,
tatupu70 said:
Looks like commissions are going to be a little light for mortgage brokers this summer....
Realtors don't get commission on refis, so doesn't look like much has changed for them.