patrick.net

clambo says

re: rancher's comments.

In 2011, 72% of births to black women were outside of marriage. Among these therefore a high percentage will be using govt. assistance.

Govt. programs actually promote single motherhood in locations which have subsidized housing. He may have been commenting on how this traps them into poverty.

A Liberal could have said the same thing in an Editorial, and gotten award for it.

There should be no distancing - this situation was handled horribly by the government esp. since the issue is not entirely clear. His political/racial beliefs are completely irrelevant.

Bellingham Bill says

smaulgld says

and its misguided to think either party does not have a slew of racists among their ranks.

The Democrats largely purged their racists, so the situation is fucking far from symmetrical.

Who is racist amongst today's Republican politicians by your definition?

mell says

There should be no distancing - this situation was handled horribly by the
government esp. since the issue is not entirely clear

Hmm not so. The govt has been litigating him for over a decade and he hasn't paid rents for more than that. From several accounts the gubmnt waited for the appeal period to be over before moving in. How is that horrible?

How is the fact that this guy has reprehensible ideas about black people a factor in this case? Id expect no less from a redneck cowboy like him. But many black, brown people, and most Asians have strong racially insensitive beliefs. Ever spoken to a Slav about Jews? It ain't pretty. Racism is a condition of 95% of the world, so why is it so shocking to find it in a Nevada cattle rancher?

My opinion: the Feds lost, and are searching for ways to muddy the waters surrounding this issue. Harry Reid is the real criminal.

lostand confused says

mell says

There should be no distancing - this situation was handled horribly by the

government esp. since the issue is not entirely clear

Hmm not so. The govt has been litigating him for over a decade and he hasn't paid rents for more than that. From several accounts the gubmnt waited for the appeal period to be over before moving in. How is that horrible?

The legal situation has been contested because he owned the land before the agency existed. This is the smallest fish they could fry and they move in with the swat team. They were the ones ready to kill innocent people. But I can see your point.

CaptainShuddup says

dublin hillz says

His comments were probably taken out of context, he was probably referring to those slavs in eastern europe, aka russians and ukranians, the ultimate wiggas.

HA! Shows how much you know!

The Uyghurs are from China!

I remember they were mentioning that ethnic group on TV during the knife attack, I was like, "did they just say wigga on tv?" lol

mell says

The legal situation has been contested because he owned the land before the agency existed. This is the smallest fish they could fry and they move in with the swat team. They were the ones ready to kill innocent people. But I can see your point.

The BLM was created in 1946, by merging two other agencies which go back many decades before, arguably to the late 18th century.

Bundy's father bought their ranch in 1948, but not the land managed by the BLM.

Bundy has said

I abide by all of Nevada state laws. But I don’t recognize the United States government as even existing.

Iosef V HydroCabron says

The BLM was created in 1946, by merging two other agencies which go back many decades before, arguably to the late 18th century.

Bundy's father bought their ranch in 1948, but not the land managed by the BLM.

Bundy has said

I abide by all of Nevada state laws. But I don’t recognize the United States government as even existing.

There's definitely a valid point in the governments efforts trying to enforce this, just not by any means (swat). However how is that different from the federal government tolerating pot legalization in more and more states (which I applaud) although technically federal law should trump state law? Could they tolerate it in this case as well? These are not simple issues.

mell says

However how is that different from the federal government tolerating pot legalization

Not much difference.

Selective law enforcement is evil.

dublin hillz says

The Uyghurs are from China!

I remember they were mentioning that ethnic group on TV during the knife attack, I was like, "did they just say wigga on tv?" lol

Well I'm convinced without any proof, that they Chinese didn't give us the English spelling. And that spelling is wayyyyyyyy off. What other word in the English language has a "Wig" sound by "Uyg".

I'm pretty sure, there were high level meetings on how to spell it when it first hit the news, in both Washington and the in the Liberal Press.

I'm sure FOX didn't give a shit, they would have loved to have had an excuse to say "Wigger" one thousand times in the course of a News day. They would have giggled like Wayne and Garth as they told the news.

mell says

The legal situation has been contested because he owned the land before the
agency existed. Th

Source?

I think 720 is an easy number to remember.

Call it Crazy says

But, does anyone see a problem here??

Not at that FICO level.

http://www.housingwire.com/blogs/1-rewired/post/29796-wheres-the-key-to-unlocking-the-door-to-homeownership

As Mark Zandi and Jim Parrott have pointed out, the average credit score on loans to purchase homes in 2013 was over 750, some 50 points higher than the average score a decade ago. Before the housing bubble, nearly one-fifth of mortgage borrowers had credit scores below 660. Today, only one-tenth of borrowers have credit scores in this range. In 1999, 25% of first-time homebuyers had credit scores of 620 or below. Today, getting an affordable mortgage with a credit score below 620 is a very tall order indeed.

As I've mentioned before, and as the late Tanta on Calculated Risk has pointed out, subprime under traditional subprime standards where you evaluate credit, capacity to pay, and collateral, wasn't a problem per se. What was a problem was when you stopped evaluating one or more of those factors, as was done for many loan products during the boom, such as Alt-A loans and many of the low-doc/no-doc stuff.

620 can be just fine if you underwrite properly, as was done in traditional subprime. When 620 doesn't work is when you are lax in underwriting and get unexpected or unpredicted default rates.

Call it Crazy says

The survey also says that half of all Americans don’t even know what the minimum required FICO score is to qualify for a loan.

Not sure why that's particularly relevant. The score needed can differ from lender to lender, and the actual score is based on the lender's standards for interest rates.

Just as important as credit are capacity to pay and collateral, see above.

Call it Crazy says

Go check out some stuff I posted here, specially the FICO scores.

Already responded to that, to some extent.

WOW! The UNtrustworthy are certainly in control of what information is apparent to the people!

Say hey! This was in the Wall Street Journal on March 30, 1999. Note "... how much it will buy."

Holy cow/interesting/compelling ...!

And where is it up to date??? Right here ... see the first chart shown in this thread.
Recent Dow day is Monday, April 25, 2014 __ Level is 103.4

WOW! It is hideous that this is hidden! Is there any such "Homes, Inflation Adjusted"? Yes! This was in the New York Times on August 27, 2006:

And up to date (by me) is here:
http://patrick.net/?p=1219038&c=999083#comment-999083

WOW! The UNtrustworthy are certainly in control of what information is apparent to the people!

And "ThePublic Be Suckered"
http://patrick.net/?p=1230886

Call it Crazy says

They made the mistake of using their homes as ATMs because they felt "houses only go up in price", until they don't... Had they been responsible and NOT pulled the cash out, they wouldn't be underwater or foreclosed because they couldn't make the payment..

But, you missed the point of the OP.... Back in the run up to the bubble, all this ATMed money was flowing into the economy to buy all the crap I listed. This artificially propped up a lot of businesses with all this BORROWED money..

Now, the authors of the article above are saying, even though prices have risen just like before the bubble popped, people aren't or can't ATM out that money again, so even though home prices are up, don't expect a HUGE influx of HELOC borrowed money to enter the economy....

It ain't happening this time...

People get carried away by using their homes as a bottomless ATM, and spend like there is no tomorrow. They have no discipline, and no common sense. People who win the lottery are no different, they spend like crazy, and in a couple of years they are dead broke again. What a wasted once in a life time opportunity to change their lives forever.
Professional sports players who make millions are just as stupid. They think money grows on trees in their backyards.
If you show me a million dollars, I don't see a million, I see $25,000 per year for ever, because that is the dividends I can reasonably expect in the stock market.

Call it Crazy says

Maybe this is what's holding back the big recovery in houses. First, let's look at the average FICO credit scores today in the country:

*

*

Now, what age group does the First Time home buyer come from?

What age group does the move-up buyer come from?

Now, let's look at the FICO scores of people who got approved for mortgages:

*

*

It looks like the banks ARE loosening up a little bit..

But, does anyone see a problem here??

I sure do see a problem here. The score requirements are excessively high. Even the average middle aged guy won't qualify as per your charts. If they can pay rent on time, they can pay a mortgage on time to live in their own castle.

Strategist says

he score requirements are excessively high.

This has nothing to do with age and length of credit as chart indicates. I am 38 with a score over 800. Scores are poor because people dont make payments. Give em a 1M loan? Don't think so.

mell says

Who is racist amongst today's Republican politicians by your definition?

Santorum, Ryan for starters.

http://crooksandliars.com/diane-sweet/santorum-i-didnt-say-black-people-i-sa

Mr "Write off the 47%"Romney.

The entire conservative ideology and playbook is substantially racist.

Both in thought and deed.

The GOP attacks the minorities without really offering the aid they need, which is substantial, sustained investment in their lives, investment that is neither "charity" or loans that just put them in debt to the system that is profiting from them so much.

Democrats don't do such a hot job on this either, but at least they're trying, sorta.

The bottom line is we needs tons more redistribution in this country, and people who oppose that are racist, but they hide behind their small-government ideology to seem respectable.

I'm having such a bad day...
My wife attacks me, Hrhjuliet attacks me, my friends here attack me, my girlfriend dumps me, and even my loyal dog barks at me.
Did I do something wrong?

Here is a hint:

Strategist says

My wife attacks me

...and...

Strategist says

my girlfriend dumps me

There might be a correlation? ;-)

Call it Crazy says

And then the dog barks at him.... Hmmmmm.....

hahhaah oh boy...

I wonder what the avg FICO score was in the mid 2000s. It is easy to blame banks when they get bailed out. But I feel like if the avg FICO score was 740 from 2003-2008, patnet might not exist! Lowering the score requirements just to make sure cash investors don't snatch up all the properties is not a winning, long-term solution.

Call it Crazy says

I don't think they're lowering requirements to help johnQpublic buy a house. They're lowering requirements because very few can qualify for 720 FICO loans... New applications have fallen to levels not seen in decades...

Ya I see your point. It's a slight shift in business model to keep the business alive when nobody is interested in a loan. Makes sense. The average is still a long way from the average FICO score in the age brackets you showed, though!

I know some people who have poor credit scores.

By odd coincidence, 1. declared bankruptcy defaulted on rental property 2. three others who were foreclosed 3. who racked up $70K+ on credit cards.

Some people can't be trusted with the keys to your car, a credit card, credit, money or a bottle of booze. They'll consume them/destroy them.

Re: some comments above.
The huge burst in mortgage originations in late 2000s was because you had easy access to credit. Often both the broker and the buyer were liars and no one cared.

However, banks do not have the capital to lend for all of these mortgages. They very often sell these on the "secondary market" which packages them into bonds called Mortgage Backed Securities=MBS which are sold worldwide.

The rules are becoming stricter because Fannie and Freddie are selling the MBS, and many are being bought by the Federal Reserve. They aren't going to like MBS that is comprised of bad mortgages. There are already too many out there today (50% Alt-A/Sub prime mortgages today)

Call it Crazy says

a few years ago, the average was in the mid to upper 700's, then it's dropped to around 700, then it's dropped into the mid 600's.

Now he tells me the majority that he is seeing is in the low 600's and some in the upper 500's...

That is what passes for "recovery"!

clambo says

However, banks do not have the capital to lend for all of these mortgages. They very often sell these on the "secondary market" which packages them into bonds called Mortgage Backed Securities=MBS which are sold worldwide.

Ya, it's hella riskier now to lend than it was when you sold the loan within 30 days in the 2000s. Good point.

More and more people see the current recovery as a scam, thus they fear making any investment that depends upon a real recovery.

bgamall4 says

Did you know that a court in GB just ruled that Rothschild Zionism is not Abrahamic Judaism? So much for AIPAC saying that criticism of Israel is Anti-Semitism.

Still peddling that? It was a case brought before an employment tribunal over a year ago. It didn't rule that 'Rothschild Zionism is not Abrahamic Judaism.' A case was brought by an academic against the University and College Union for supposed anti-semitic harassment based on the UCU's boycott campaigns against Israel. The tribunal found in favour of the UCU on all 10 complaints of harassment and criticised the academic for 'an impermissible attempt to achieve a political end by litigious means.'

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/tribunal-slams-academic-for-bringing-anti-semitism-case/2002841.article

How that year old employment tribunal case morphs into what you are now claiming is anyone's guess. You certainly have a rather selective filter...

bgamall4 says

In February, 2004, Alan Greenspan said you could get a "better deal" by taking an adjustable mortgage

Feb 2004 was an interesting time. Rate hikes were still some months away, but this graph:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=yGf

shows the disconnect between Fed rates and the long-term rates people were getting in 2002-2004.

looks like Greenspan was giving bad advice in 2004, but short-term rates never went above long-term rates of 2004, so getting an ARM wasn't a suicide loan per se.

The Ballad of Cliven Bundy

sbh says

Vicente says

The Ballad of Cliven Bundy

Cliven Bundy, standing up for the idea of not paying your bills. Honestly now, is it racist all of a sudden, just to WONDER if someone is better off under slavery? This poor man is being wrongly slandered by the liberal press.

That's a good reason for a simple flat tax (with a special temporary fee on the 0.1-1% in times of crisis) because by that logic the 47% are standing up for not paying their bills either, in fact with negative effective rates a lot receive money. It's like Bundy being paid by the government for farming the land ;)

"Your proposals about the tools and seed and your maintenance are all right enough, but the land, you remember, belongs to me. You cannot expect me to give you your liberty and my own land for nothing. That would not be reasonable, would it?"

http://www.wealthandwant.com/docs/ajo_slavery.html

I propose we distribute 160 productive acres of farmland to every household in America.

There are 120M households now, so that's just 19.2 billion acres. There is 400M farmland acres in the US, so we only need to find 18.8B more, which is 30M square miles, the land area of the "lower 48" x ~10.

Well, so much for that idea! Looks like natural capital is getting pretty scarce nowadays.

Funny thing is, Japan is actually abandoning their marginal farmland now. They got pretty overcrowded last century, so it's not "easy pickings" quite yet over there, the abandoned farmland is generally pretty remote and/or hillside, terraced subsistence crash crops like mandarin oranges, konnyaku, yams, wasabi, tea -- fiddly stuff, not bulk cash crops you can collect with a combine.

Charts are showing the past but there is no historical context so they're meaningless.

In 1929 stocks were an asset bubble. Banks took depositors money and used high margin to buy stocks. Both are not possible today. Credit fueled asset bubbles can pop. Banks and many individuals were wiped out.

Houses bought with easy credit and MBS derivatives of their mortgages were both bubbles that popped. Lots of capital was lost.

Today stocks are not all speculative bubbles, although some are overvalued. Tesla, Netflix, Amazon, Facebook, and others are bubbles. But they aren't bought with credit, people buy stocks with their savings left over after taxes.

Warren Buffet didn't become super rich worrying about a crash, he ignores them and keeps seeking good stocks or companies to invest in.

There is going to be another dip in the stock market, it's inevitable. Meanwhile you can collect dividends and this will cushion the blow.

Apple is paying me every quarter to hold onto their shares and if I live long enough, they'll have paid me back every penny I ever paid for Apple stock.

Does technical analysis really work?

You can't compare 1987 and 1929 crushes. In 1929, if you were short you would have plenty of time to exit. In 1987, you could have gone long at the end of black Monday and would be sitting on profit in 3 months.

You can visit the Museum of American Finance down on Wall Street and see what causes depressions.

Everyone knows that when someone clicks on a real estate site that is counted as a closing.

HEY YOU says

Everyone knows that when someone clicks on a real estate site that is counted as a closing.

This business model works for facebook.

and 10M jobs short of "full employment" (red)

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=yOD

really amazing how the 1990s boom got us +20M jobs off of the little recession low, while the current recovery is just digging us out of a very deep hole.

160M jobs by 2020 would be an impossible steep slope up, though since max employment is going to hover over 150M for the foreseeable future (as the boomers retire) even 150M might be tough.

And if we hit a recession this decade, Down Goes Frazier again.

Many people just missed the window to stop paying and live rent free. These prudent debtors who now have lost their jobs have no choice. Others have given up on getting a modification. Others got a modification but still cannot handle their debt.

Deleveraging is not over, yet corporate (another form of private debt) is up.

We transferred a lot of private debt into public debt, yet private debt is still growing.

The solution to too much debt is DEFAULT and not refinancing.

I don't see any recessionary drivers for this decade, actually.

The 1990 recession didn't come out of nowhere, the oil patch hit rough times and there was a partial credit overextension pullback that slowed things down a bit.

The 2001 recession is harder to figure out, but there was an immense amount of pre S-O bullshit corporate shenanigans going on that over-inflated the climate, and a lot of dotcom implosion took out the wider economy.

Information employment has yet to recover:

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

The 2007-2009 recession was obvious enough in its drivers:

https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/CMDEBT

but that graph shows were only just starting to burn up the credit candle.

And Gen Y is arriving on-scene and they have relatively clean credit slates, well if you don't count the ~$30,000 of college debt half of them owe.

The more you know about this economy the less there is to like, LOL.