patrick.net

APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says

Come on, Mr Dan,

We're a family oriented website!

A true family-oriented website would have tutorials for skinning realtors and cooking your neighbors with yams in preparation for the next financial collapse.

Please stop calling it "Bank of America"; the correct usage is "Skank of America."

Well... if we're talking Satan here, nobody can fill that role like Skank Of America. Remember when artists told it it like it is ?

"Mama, she keeps them unprepared
To meet the enemy
That's comin' unto us
Teach them that evil dwells across the sea
Lives in a mountain
Like they see on TV

Down in the heart of town
The Devil dresses up
He keeps his nails clean
Did you think he'd be a boogeyman?"

Buffy St. Marie

cc to Brain Moynihan ?

My payment was about $100 more than my property tax payment, affordability eroded along with my salary, all other costs still going up, I had to let the place go to the next buyer.

Mark D says

people still post zerohedge articles? LOL

affordability is all about monthly payment which is still very low compared to the last few decades due to STILL-VERY-LOW interest rates. how about a real chart?

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/COMPHAI

APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says

Come on, Mr Dan,

We're a family oriented website!

Yes, I often confuse you with Mr Rodgers

thomaswong.1986 says

"being white trash poor farmer working with black farmers in the fields
hoeing cotton."

Ya, po whiiiiiite trash, but with a scholarship to LSU. And a master's and bachelor's degree. If that ain't white priveledge, then what is?

Robertson received a bachelor's degree in physical education and a master's in education.[15

As an athlete in high school, Robertson was all-state in football, baseball, and track, which afforded him the opportunity to attend Louisiana Tech University in Ruston on a football scholarship in the late 1960s.[8] There he played first-string quarterback for the Bulldogs, ahead of Pro Football Hall of Famer Terry Bradshaw,[9][10] the first overall pick in the 1970 NFL Draft. When he arrived at Tech in 1966, Bradshaw caused a media frenzy on account of his reputation of being a football sensation from nearby Shreveport.[11][12] Robertson was a year ahead of Bradshaw, and was the starter for two seasons in 1966 and 1967, and chose not to play in 1968.[13]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Robertson

What bothers me more than what Mr Robertson said was the reaction from some on the right to almost immediately turn this into yet another "Liberals Versus Conservatives" pissing contest, with little if any of their arguments or points having anything to do with what was said. Some of the comments being made are outright disgusting. Some people need to seriously grow up and act with an IQ beyond their shoe size

Racism- no matter what political allegiances one might have- is NOT acceptable. I grew up in the South, and while racism exists everywhere, to suggest that things were all peachy-keen back then in the South- or frankly anywhere else in the country- is a bunch of bullshit. I am in my 30's but even as a teenager I heard some utter trash coming out of people's mouths in regards to other races.

Lucky for us, those who make racist remarks are in the minority: They do not represent the ideals of what this country and its constitution stands for.

edvard2 says

Lucky for us, those who make racist remarks are in the minority: They do not represent the ideals of what this country and its constitution stands for.

All the people who wrote the US constitution did so with the understanding that the USA was created by Whites for the benefit of Whites only. US citizens before the 1960's believed this fact. To try to change this made you a traitor.

There was no nonwhite immigration before the 1960's. US citizens were proud to live in a racially homogenous country before the 1960's.

What you consider 'racism' was accepted as a universal fact that all people have a right to live in a racially homogenous land. The USA is this land for western European whites.

Many studies have shown that racially homogenous countries are happier and have a higher level of trust among citizens. Forced diversity destroyed the natural trust between citizens previously white countries had.

Diversity is only pushed in white countries. Non white countries do not practice diversity.

foxmannumber1 says

All the people who wrote the constitution did so with the understanding that the USA was created by Whites for the benefit of Whites only. US citizens before the 1960's believed this fact. To try to change this made you a traitor.

The constitution is a written document with guaranteed rights which are spelled out very clearly. There is nowhere in that document that claims any intent from its authors. As such, your argument is not an argument, but rather an assertion based on personal opinion instead of facts, and hence the remainder of your commentary is nonsense.

edvard2 says

The constitution is a written document with guaranteed rights which are spelled out very clearly. There is nowhere in that document that claims any intent from its authors. As such, your argument is not an argument, but rather an assertion based on personal opinion instead of facts, and hence the remainder of your commentary is nonsense.

Actions speak louder than words. It is a fact that there was no nonwhite immigration before the 1960's.

Racial homogeneity was such a basic part of life that it did not need to be spelled out. The founding fathers could not fathom a world where Whites gave up their lives and prosperity so that nonwhites can attempt to create something that they failed to create in their own country.

edvard2 says

What bothers me more than what Mr Robertson said was the reaction from some on
the right to almost immediately turn this into yet another "Liberals Versus
Conservatives" pissing contest, with little if any of their arguments or points
having anything to do with what was said. Some of the comments being made are
outright disgusting.

Yeah, I had 3 extreme conservative(not quite tepublicans)relatives(wife's) that I argued with recently about what Robertson said and how offensive it was, along with his BS implications. Of those 3, NONE of them had ever seen the show and 2 of them have neither cable nor a satelite dish to even get A&E, and not only were they defending him, but were actually giddy about what he said and it kind of gave them the pathetic courage to expand upon his rants with rants of their own.

Not only did they see nothing at all wrong with their thoughts and words, they felt that they were entitled to feel that way and say similar or worse things without any consequences.
The loudest and most obnoxious of the 3 has an adult son with his kids on welfare of every type too, not to mention that all 3 with 1 more than most people, are VERY religous.

I pointed out their hypocrisy and the irony of it and they didn't even get that.

foxmannumber1 says

It is a fact that there was no nonwhite immigration before the 1960's.

Now you're just proving your stupidity and the fact that you're full of shit.

Asians? Mexicans? Africans?

foxmannumber1 says

Actions speak louder than words. It is a fact that there was no nonwhite immigration before the 1960's.

The foundation of your argument is totally wrong. There's no sense in trying to continue a conversation when your side of it is nowhere near being attached to reality. You are wrong. Plain and simple. That's all I have to say about it because I'm not going to waste my time by even entertaining the notion that what you have to say deserves the privilege of further attention.

Call it Crazy says

The question is, have YOU ever watched the show??

Yes, and I couldn't stand it enough to watch it to the end of the show, or about 10-20 minutes. Too much of the scripted stupidity by stupid people, to try and act MORE stupidly.

As I have said before, that show is neither arts OR entertainment.

upisdown says

Now you're just proving your stupidity and the fact that you're full of shit.

Asians? Mexicans? Africans?

Demographic records show that I'm speaking fact.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_American

http://www.flowofhistory.org/themes/movement_settlement/uspolicytimeline.php

This is more fact supporting my argument that there was very little nonwhite immigration into the US before the 1960's.

The USA was not built on diversity. No country has excelled with or survived a racially diverse population.

Quite correct.
It is required Liberal Indoctrination.

upisdown says

Call it Crazy says

The question is, have YOU ever watched the show??

Yes, and I couldn't stand it enough to watch it to the end of the show, or about 10-20 minutes. Too much of the scripted stupidity by stupid people, to try and act MORE stupidly.

As I have said before, that show is neither arts OR entertainment.

SoftShell says

Quite correct.
It is required Liberal Indoctrination.

Huh??

Jesse makes his money by telling poor blacks that white man is out to get them. This is sort of expected from him. There is a lot of competition for the attention of low IQ population.

How about a little "Sympathy For The Devil".

http://www.elyrics.net/read/r/rolling-stones-lyrics/sympathy-for-the-devil-lyrics.html

FUCK YOU LUCIFER!

"Killed the Czar and his ministers", but you didn't kill ALL the money changing bank STOCK HOLDERS & lay their "soul to waste"

The DEVIL is an ABJECT FAILURE!

Why do you hate institutions that safeguard your hard earned credits?
Sure, they may get a little greedy here and there, but doesn't it beat 'the mattress'??

HydroCabron says

Please stop calling it "Bank of America"; the correct usage is "Skank of America."

SoftShell says

Why do you hate institutions that safeguard your hard earned credits?

Sure, they may get a little greedy here and there, but doesn't it beat 'the mattress'??

HydroCabron says

Please stop calling it "Bank of America"; the correct usage is "Skank of America."

I'm not sure: I think it's because I hate freedom and wish abortion upon all our unborns, as well as deaths for all the ladies.

I should show more gratitude for institutions which keep all that taxpayer money safe in the hands of their executives and shareholders.

I like Wells Fargo. They gave me a free toaster oven once, and as many refrigerator magnets as my refrigerator will carry.

What??

upisdown says

SoftShell says

Quite correct.
It is required Liberal Indoctrination.

Huh??

Well, blame it on your ancestors. They are the ones who decided to 'import' hundreds of thousands of Africans and enslave them.
We have a self imposed racially diverse population. The african did not come of their own free will.

Therefore, we owe it to them to expose them to the teachings and honed thought processes that have enabled the white man to achieve a higher IQ.

As I've stated before, time will make us all equal in intelligence and the racial dividers on all sides of the kaleidoscope will be the ones left behind.

foxmannumber1 says

http://www.flowofhistory.org/themes/movement_settlement/uspolicytimeline.php

This is more fact supporting my argument that there was very little nonwhite immigration into the US before the 1960's.

The USA was not built on diversity. No country has excelled with or survived a racially diverse population.

APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says

DEATH TO BANK OF FUCK AMERICA IN THE ASS AND WELLS FARGO IN 2014!

Dude, what took you so long? The first day of the year was like 16 minutes over when you posted this. I expected such an important post to be sent out as soon as the ball in NYC hit the ground.

There's no better way to start a new year than by skull-fucking a banker.

Ceffer says

I like Wells Fargo. They gave me a free toaster oven once, and as many refrigerator magnets as my refrigerator will carry.

You know they do that so that you're refrigerator will topple over from the weight of all the magnets and pin you to the ground where you will slowly die of internal bleeding all while they foreclose on your house.

Never trust a bank.

He's a racial divider.
His type will be around exploiting for the next 4-5 generations...

FortWayne says

Jesse makes his money by telling poor blacks that white man is out to get them. This is sort of expected from him. There is a lot of competition for the attention of low IQ population.

Well that's your hard earned tax dollars at work, not bank notes!
Cut BofA some slack, I've been with them for 30 years...

HydroCabron says

SoftShell says

Why do you hate institutions that safeguard your hard earned credits?

Sure, they may get a little greedy here and there, but doesn't it beat 'the mattress'??

HydroCabron says

Please stop calling it "Bank of America"; the correct usage is "Skank of America."

I'm not sure: I think it's because I hate freedom and wish abortion upon all our unborns, as well as deaths for all the ladies.

SoftShell says

Therefore, we owe it to them to expose them to the teachings and honed thought processes that have enabled the white man to achieve a higher IQ.

As I've stated before, time will make us all equal in intelligence and the racial dividers on all sides of the kaleidoscope will be the ones left behind.

Whites owe blacks nothing.

The difference between white and black intelligence is significant and genetic. This intelligence gap is the root cause of all black problems. There is no fixing it.

This is damning evidence.

A lot of these dual citizens in congress and other high levels of public office are double agents that actively work against US interest. Kick them all out, or have them renounce their foreign citizenship. I wonder if the chinese are dumb enough to have isrealeis running their country.

Those were just the Democrats who got caught.

One of the reasons why I am Republican when they are'nt perfect is the propensity of my Democrat school chums to steal and use drugs.

Call it Crazy says

Jail survey: 7 in 10 felons register as Democrats

Well, that was the whole point of the War on Drugs, wasn't it? It was to remove registered Democrats from the voting booth. Think about it, why the fuck shouldn't convicts have the right to vote? What legal justification is there for that? Hell, if they don't have the right to vote, then voting isn't a right, by definition. It's a privilege. A right cannot be taken away.

Let's look at the facts.

1. The prison population increased 700% from 1970 to 2005.

2. Half of the people in prison are there for drug crimes.

3. Drug possession is very selectively enforced with blacks, Hispanics, and generally democrats prosecuted far more than WASP republicans even though both groups use the drugs at the same rate.

Black Americans were nearly four times as likely as whites to be arrested on charges of marijuana possession in 2010, even though the two groups used the drug at similar rates, according to new federal data.

That's right! Four times as many convictions despite the exact same drug usage. When you compensate for that math, the 7 out of 10 become 7 out of 13, or about 50%. Damn, don't you hate it when the facts don't support your conclusion.

And by the way, most crime today is financial (white collar) crime, which isn't prosecuted at all. Just look at all the bankers and financial manipulators who got away with causing the Second Great Depression and massive financial fraud. No one went to jail.

If we actually prosecuted financial crimes, 9 out of 10 felons would be Republicans. And if we legalized drugs, like they should be, it would be more like 95 out of 100 felons are Wall Street Republicans.

There is, however, one group of people who, per capita, are statistically make up way less of the prison population than any other group save those with political connections. This group is, of course, atheists. Yep. If you're going to judge the morality of a group by what percentage of its population is in prison, then atheists win hands down.

sbh says

The Republican campaign to suppress votes has found new fertile ground. They can claim Democrats as criminals and ban them from voting. It's bad enough to be female or old or poor or a minority. Now all you have to be is a Democrat and BOOM you're a criminal and shouldn't be able to vote.

Many are in prison, because Clinton dismantled the interdiction of drugs into the

USA.. had the prior Reagan/Bush policies continued, far far less drugs would

hit the street and therefore fewer people would have become pushers and users...

AND BINGO, you would not be complaining about the millions in prison today...

But go ahead and thank your chummy boy Billy Bob Clinton on that one...

How the Clinton Administration is Abandoning the War Against Drugs

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/1994/06/bg989nbsp-how-the-clinton-administration

Before Columbia, Clinton Abandoned U.S. War on Drugs

https://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/msg49780.html

Here are a few highlights as noted by the FRC:

"President Clinton has overseen the wholesale dismantling of
government agencies that are at least partly responsible for the
successes of the 1980s. The Clinton Administration has:

"Dropped the drug war as one of the National Security Council's
top priorities. It is now number 29 of 29.

"Cut the drug czar's office by 80 percent from 146 to 25
personnel. It was partially restored by Congressional mandate.

"Folded the State Department's Office of International Narcotics
Matters into a potpourri organization that handles issues like
labor, environment and population concerns.

"Cut military anti-drug efforts by signing an executive order
drastically reducing the Pentagon's interdiction efforts. These
cuts included 1,000 military positions devoted to anti-drug
activities, a move Rep. Charles Schumer (D-NY) called "a terrible
mistake."

"Former Drug Enforcement Administration director Robert Bonner
stated, 'I believe that there has been a near total absence of
presidential leadership by President Clinton in the fight to turn
back illegal drug use in this country...It [the Administration]
clearly fails to promote an increased awareness of the dangers of
drug abuse, arguably encourages it...The Clinton Administration's
national drug strategy has failed miserably, and indeed it is a
tragedy. The President must reverse this trend and start leading
our nation's anti-drug efforts.'

"Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) said, 'I've been in Congress for
over two decades, and I have never, never, never seen a president
who cares less about this issue.'

"Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) told Lee Brown during the (former)
drug czar's confirmation hearings, 'Either the president is with
you, or he has just given you a chair at the cabinet level...If
it is the latter, you are getting ready to be the biggest fall
guy in the Clinton Administration...We might as well close [the
drug office] down and stop the pretense.'

Dan8267 says

3. Drug possession is very selectively enforced with blacks, Hispanics, and generally democrats prosecuted far more than WASP republicans even though both groups use the drugs at the same rate.

Thank Clinton on that...

You progressive Liberals.... should pick up where Monica left off ...

Rimming Clintons ass clean every morning...

"Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) said, 'I've been in Congress for
over two decades, and I have never, never, never seen a president
who cares less about this issue.'

bgamall4 says

Financial centers like SF tend to keep their value. It could crash but only if the financial sector crashes. That could happen, but who has a crystal ball over 30 years?

To call your statement "naive"... would be an understatement...

http://patrick.net/?p=1235339

A Closer Look at 'Bubble Areas' (2Q2002)

www.fhfa.gov/webfiles/1065/Focus2Q02.pdf‎

Real housing prices in San Francisco and San Jose

In the past (especially the late 1980s and early 1990s) we witnessed bubble phenomena in certain areas along the coasts where supply tends to be slow to respond to changes in demand.

This quarter, we take a closer look at some of the metropolitan areas that have exhibited bubbles in the past and examine their current status. A few of the most well recognized bubble areas (historically) are San Jose, San Francisco, Boston, and Honolulu.

Silicon Valley:

Real housing prices in San Francisco and San Jose (Figures 1 and 2) exhibited bubble behavior in the late 1980s and early 1990s1. Housing values rose by around 80 percent in both areas between the start of 1984 (late 1983) and the fourth quarter of 1989. Housing values in San Francisco then proceeded to drop by 37 percent over the next six years. In San Jose, housing values bottomed out in early 1995, also declining by 37 percent....By the fourth quarter of 1990, one year after the 1989 peak, housing in San Francisco and San Jose had already lost around 10 percent (give or take a few percentage points) of its value.

Honolulu:

Honolulu is the only major metropolitan area with significant house price declines in the late 1990s, so it is an interesting case to examine (see Figure 3). Between the second quarter of 1991 and the first quarter of 2001, real housing values in Honolulu dropped by about 30 percent.

Boston:

Boston experienced the largest cycle of the 1980s, with 110 percent real house price growth between third quarter 1982 and second quarter 1988 (see Figure 4). Subsequent declines were about 28 percent over the next 7 years.