patrick.net

So far the trend seems to remain in place.

indigenous says

This plus the fact that China is re balancing so the demand for commodities is way down.

China is also offloading US treasuries - watch out ;)

bgamall4 says

Perhaps they will come forward some day. But the argument that it is fake is not based upon family members blowing the cover of other family members. Now look at you being stupid Bigsby.

What about friends? How many friends have come forward? How many acquaintances? How many tens of thousands of people do you think that amounts to? You think this entire thing is a hoax because you believe 2 people look the same, one father acted strangely to YOU, and what else, oh yes, you can't see what you think are real tears in a couple of photos/interviews. That's it, isn't it? Try and guess how stupid that makes YOU look.

Robber Baron Elite Scum says

I don't mean to be rude or anything.

But if you are that young... Don't worry too much about what's happening with the economy.

WARNING!

Renting for Half The Cost has been caught in multiple lies on this forum. When caught this person does not admit wrongdoing but doubles down on the lie to ridiculous levels.

Do not believe anything posted by this person.

You have been warned.

mell says

indigenous says

This plus the fact that China is re balancing so the demand for commodities is way down.

China is also offloading US treasuries - watch out ;)

Yea but they already have taken dollars for goods.

Yup in the future they will buy fewer treasuries but they are looking at the same situation as the US in the early 30s they are not going to have fun. Until they develop their consumer market.

Bubble 2.0

or rather 1.1 since the only difference from 1.0 is that this time the govt is promising bailouts BEFORE the crash rather than after.

Tim Aurora says

hrhjuliet says

It's not inventory, it's price. The houses on the market are going to sit there until the prices go down.

Is that a wish, hope or dream. Anyways, you are allowed to have an opinion but until you can back it up with some kind of logic, it remains only as a wish.

It's not a wish. My home price goes down if the market goes down. I can see past my own little world though. The average home price should be about twice the median income. The market is artificially inflated and and therefore a risky investment. Only a fool would buy now. Yes, some fools will still be out there buying in this market, but that group is going to shrink. You can't make people buy at inflated prices. If you think this market is going up you are the one making wishes. At best it will flatline, but more than likely the market is going to tilt down, no matter how subtle, towards normal. The powers that be can't be can't prop up this mess forever.

A hybrid.

Behold the Champagne & Chicago Hot Dog!

Home prices should defiantly go up with these mortgages government backed.

They will very slowly lower the standards one by one.

The tapering from the Federal Reserve should also crash the precious metals markets.

Possibly strengthen dollars by a long shot and have another bubble economy.

Real estate flipping will be back. Those smart enough to quickly get in and out before the bubble pops will profit.

Another MASSIVE tech bubble should be here too like the on in 1999.

If the tech bubble collapses... The dollars will be moved to real estate.

Furthering the bubble.

During the height of the bubble. Precious metals will be all-time lows.

That's the time to acquire it. Not now.

Losses of the precious metals market maybe as much as 80% decline of gold and silver. Especially silver.

Robber Baron Elite Scum says

You are not a quack and should really not be ignored. Happy to say.

When ducks quack, people listen.

Flipping is already en vogue and tapering. It would need to heat up big time to get them back in. I feel like this subprime will benefit lower middle class more...ie those with weaker credit scores. Maybe won't help the middle and upper middle as much? And thus not be widespread?

I suppose this is the story of FHA since its inception. It should have ended within 5 years like the ownership policy that immediately preceded it (holc?). But when a "free" market becomes dependent on crack...there is only one institution able to provide endless supplies.

Never cease to be amazed at how simple everything is to Mish.

Chicago is an easy city to live in without a car, or to get around in without a car if you don't want to drive downtown (that is you take a train in or "the el.)"

This is because of taxis, which compete with eachother and have a long established system that involves regulations and licensing etc.

These new less regulated networks are great in some ways, but given the chance to grow, they could destroy or drastically hurt the ability of those in the old system to make a living driving a cab.

Then what happens ?

Will what happens automatically be whats best in the long run for the customers who currently rely on taxi cabs to get around all the time ?

The answers to these questions are not as simple as Mish would like to make them.

I can't imagine how the thinking goes. Is it something like this ?

Competition is always good, even if it totally destroys one established system, bringing in another that ultimately might not be nearly as good, for the customers or for the service providers ?

tatupu70 says

OK--at this point I don't even know what your question is. Why don't you try to clearly state it?

No, you know what the question is. You just don't know how to answer it, so you continue to obfuscate. Not gonna re-state a question I've already stated 6 or 7 times.

tatupu70 says

Because it illustrated my point.

Um, no - non sequiturs don't illustrate your point.

tatupu70 says

Of course I understand that. And I clearly stated it in my post earlier:

tatupu70 says

You obviously use the entire index value because you are comparing to a set starting point. You want to see the change from that index starting point value.

You say you understand it, yet you refused to answer my question, and instead refer me back to an earlier post. And then you accuse ME of childish nonsense. Riiiight....

Look, I've given you ample opportunity to make your case, and it is painfully obvious now that you are unable to. All you have succeeded in is getting angry and calling me names. I believe what's going on here is that somebody told you that percentages are the way to "normalize" market data, but you haven't the slightest clue how or why, and that angers you. You can't explain it because you don't really understand it yourself.

bgamall4 says

Ah, there was a lady on the emergency line saying on the day of the hoax that the rumor was it was a hoax. Been there done that Bigsby, but it won't change your mind.

You have one person, ONE, on the day of the event saying they heard it may be a hoax (presumably not meaning a massive government hoax, but a hoax as in a prank call or some such - hardly that surprising given how out of the ordinary the actual event was) and YOU think that's proof. Like I said before, how many thousands upon thousands of people do those involved know. And how many have come forward to say that they are acting? It's a simple question. What's the answer Gary?
The answer is, as with all your hoax nonsense, that you grab hold of the most tenuous of arguments like a rabid dog whilst simultaneously ignoring the absolute tidal wave of actual evidence that runs completely contrary to what you are saying. That makes you a very foolish person and one who seems to have a very loose grip on reality.

bgamall4 says

They moved in a couple of years before and most are likely gone.

Wow, some people (you claim) moved in a couple of years before (amazing) and most are likely to have gone (YOU claim, naturally with zero evidence for said claim). That's classic Gary right there.

The market health ultimately is determined by

individual investor sentiment
valuations such as price to earnings ratio and price to book ratio
inflation (i.e., commodity prices like oil and energy)
interest rates

We need to just say no to purchasing homes in this artificially inflated market.

I used inductive reasoning and abductive reasoning to reach my conclusion. My argument does not lack logic, we simply do not agree.

Homeboy says

No, you know what the question is. You just don't know how to answer it, so you continue to obfuscate. Not gonna re-state a question I've already stated 6 or 7 times

lol--after all the nonsense you've posted you refuse to post your actual question? OK then.

I've repeatedly answered it.

Homeboy says

You say you understand it, yet you refused to answer my question, and instead refer me back to an earlier post. And then you accuse ME of childish nonsense. Riiiight....

Homeboy says

All you have succeeded in is getting angry and calling me names.

Really--what names have I called you?

Homeboy says

I believe what's going on here is that somebody told you that percentages are the way to "normalize" market data, but you haven't the slightest clue how or why, and that angers you. You can't explain it because you don't really understand it yourself.

Again--percentages normalize the gains and losses. If you know that an index loses 3%--you know exactly how much money you've lost. 3% of your investment. It works for all indices, stocks, investments, etc. It's apples to apples when comparing to other indices, other time periods, other investments, etc. And you have to use the starting value and the ending value to calculate the % return. Otherwise you don't accurately calculate the % return on your investment.

The reason you use percentages is so you can calculate the return on investment which can be compared to other ROIs.

Rin says

who hang out in the Boston sports internet lounges are like PatNet, they have a real job out there, and then, this fantasy land of speculating about trade

I just did a checkup on this kid and yes, he's interested in Fantasy Sports Boston.

Sorry, but that's no career aspiration.

What were you expecting from a country that's 90% blacks?

Great report. Sounds like a great model for the future USA.

I moved out when I was 17 to live in the college dorms and have been on my own since.

Tim Aurora says

hrhjuliet says

abductive reasoning

What the heck is abductive reasoning??

Oh dear goodness, that explains a lot.

I prefer the kind of structure, built by the priviliged in D.C., Chicago, SF and NY, to benefit their way of life, be forced on those of us in flyover country, unilaterally. And of course, funded wholly on the backs of labor via fed income taxes?

Am I doing it right, sbh

Islands and especially Island Countries have very limited resources.
Especially THAT particular Island. They sould have invaded Haiti last century and stopped them from laying their whole green ecosystem into a baron dirt wasteland.

It's good that you looked at them with a judgmental eye.

When I go to those countries, I see a different perspective than folks like you do. I don't see us as superior and them as inferior and on the shitty end of the stick.

I see that in spite we're immensely more wealthy than those countries, and our poor people look like their middle class, and their rich looks like our poor.

Elitist like Obama parade around the country trying to make uninsured poor in this country seem like some travesty.

What do you give Poor people who have everything?

More shit to whine about.

bob2356 says

New Renter says

From the NHTSA:

Air bags are the NHTSA's baby, lots of paper pushers jobs depend on "proving" air bags saving lives. Gee I wonder what the NHTSA would say?

Over half the cars in 2002 had airbags yet the number of people killed PER YEAR was about the same as 1994 when almost no cars had airbags. What don't you understand about the math involved in this? I put up the wrong ilnk before www.scienceservingsociety.com/p/155.pdf

What don't you understand about the math involved in this?

From your link:

It is known with high confidence that when a crash occurs, the presence of an airbag reduces fatality risk to drivers, whether belted or unbelted.

Apparently I'm not the only one having a hard time understanding your maths

Also:
The data on which this paper is based are overwhelming on the older airbags that constituted most of those on the roads in 2003. In recent years different “depowered” and “smart” airbags have appeared. These will have different probabilities of causing and preventing harm, different costs to purchasers, and different fleet annual replacement costs, especially for passenger airbags. It will be many years before we know near as much about the effectiveness of newer
airbags than even the meager knowledge we now have about the older ones.

The author points out the available data on airbag safety is "meager". The author also focuses on the cost effectiveness of airbags as a safety technology and points out these conclusions are based on the meager data obtained from the first generation of bags. Most tech gets better and cheaper with time, especially as the initial R&D costs are amortized.

Well if inventory is at or near record lows and 43% of purchases are all-cash then a lack of mortgage applications reflects more on those two factors than a lack of buyer interest doesn't it?

CaptainShuddup says

Elitist like Obama parade around the country trying to make uninsured poor in this country seem like some travesty.

I knew could work Obama into a post about travelling in DR. I think I'll post a thread about sunspots and see what creative way you can come up with to blame sunspots on Obama. You really need to see a mental health professional about your obsession.

It shows a lack of "natural" interest in home purchases. All-cash purchasers aren't generally planning to inhabit the house themselves, so their buying is a speculative bet on either (1) natural buyers coming back to the market or (2) more demand for rentals.

I think what everyone seems to miss is that the value of housing is inseparable from the capacity of natural occupants of such houses to pay. Right now the natural purchasers of houses, particularly Millennials, are getting kicked in the ass economically. OTOH, the consensus seems to be that it's only a matter of time before "household formation" picks up and there is demand for housing.

Basically, people assume that house prices dropped because the market was illiquid during the bust and natural buyers were unable to come to market. There's certainly some truth to that view, but every year that goes by with real incomes dropping, youth unemployment remaining elevated, and student loans increasing, you have to question whether the effect was temporary or permanent.

I don't know why people treat housing differently than other consumables. You don't see people on TV talking about speculating in laundry detergent or cornering the hot dog market. People understand that you cannot become a "hot dog baron" because the value of your hot dog horde is only what the natural consumers of hot dogs have to offer after higher priority expenses are paid (e.g. taxes, student loans).

marcus says

Never cease to be amazed at how simple everything is to Mish

What'd you expect, Mush never leaves his hut due to the non-stop blog posts that he trys to somehow pass off as a news feed, and from the stupid shit he constantly spews, sounds as though he learned what little he knows of the real world AND Chicago by watching Ferris Bueller's Day Off.

CaptainShuddup says

My point is, we'll be bailing out Pepsi and Coke before we know it.

The to big to Gulp act.

We already do with SNAP(food stamps).

New Renter says

Apparently I'm not the only one having a hard time understanding your maths

The writer didn't have any trouble with his math, you just have trouble acknowledging it. Let's do this slowly. In 1995 hardly any cars had airbags with 41,817 fatalites. In 2003 half the cars had airbags with 42,882 fatalities. All for a cost out of pocket to car buyers of only 54 billion 1993 to 2003. Am I going to fast for you?

Fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles went down 2% in the 50's. 0% in the 60's, 1.5% in the 70's, 1.3% in the 80's, .5% in the 90's, .4% in 2000's and up .03% 2011-2013. Where is the big decrease in the last 20 years from airbags, abs, and esc? I don't see it, could you point it out?

New Renter & Bob, wasn't this thread about young adults living with their parents?

How did it turn into an automotive safety debate?

It's all Obama's fault!!!

The Internet is about outrage, plus taking everything in as negative and personal a light as possible.

And, yes, that's an outrage! Can you believe what those bastards did - is there no justice?!

When were charts ever wrong?

Eggheads!

What the hell did they ever know?

Interesting report, what took you to Santo Domingo was this pure leisure?