patrick.net

What his opinions are about our society are distinct from the issue of the Feds using baloney to run him out of his livelihood. The scandal is what the Feds are doing to him, not what he says or believes.

Sotomayor, Holder, Sharpton, Michelle Obama, Obama's aunt, Rev. Wright, have made several comments that could be racist.

Commenters above are welcome to go to Detroit, Newark, the Bronx and see how the welfare society has helped the blacks or as this man says negroes. By the way, "negro" is not a racial epithet, it was common usage until very recently.

I worked with welfare populations for years. There are LOTS of white people on welfare and who abuse welfare. I don't know where anybody of any race or description gets the idea that only people of color are on welfare.

clambo says

What his opinions are about our society are distinct from the issue of the Feds
using baloney to run him out of his livelihood. The scandal is what the Feds are
doing to him, not what he says or believes

The scandal is a thief/trespasser/bum calling out somebody on welfare. he is on welfare, conducting business without paying expenses and willing to shoot at the landlord for daring to ask him for rent.

I still fail to see how conservatives support a socialist leech who has not paid the rent in decades-pockets the money and now pretends that that is his own land? How did this bum become the conservative hero?

The guy is a bum and gives good ranchers a bad name.

Bundy is not on welfare.

I am neither in support of the man nor against him. What I am against is the way he was treated.

He's not a scofflaw evading rents. They made up a bullshit fine for him because they want him off that land. They said he was bothering tortoises and charged him fines for it.

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.

clambo says

He's not a scofflaw evading rents

Huh?? How do you say that????

His comments about welfare may be true, but that does not change that he is the biggest welfare case of all.

Call it Crazy says

The horrible drop in new home sales that came in from the U.S. Census on Wednesday underlines the assertion of Princeton economist Atif Mian and the University of Chicago’s Amir Sufi.

That is, their assertion that the housing industry doesn’t have the depth or capacity to save the U.S. economy.

“Exactly a year ago from today, one of us wrote a short piece entitled ‘Will Housing Save the U.S. Economy?’ The conclusion was pessimistic,” the two say. “We need to temper our optimism on what a housing recovery can do…But we will not be returning to the boom years that preceded the Great Recession. The days when housing was the predominant force driving economic activity are gone…”

The bottom line is that the U.S. economy will have to look for an engine other than housing to drive growth going forward.

*

You guys really need to stop reading shit from crap sites.
In 2005/2006 homeowners were taking cash out to buy more homes, which created the bubble. Now they are not, which, if anything, indicates we are not in a bubble.
Irresponsible homeowners also used their home as an ATM machine, which led to underwater properties and foreclosures. Again indicating there is no housing bubble. You bears constantly criticized using the home as an ATM. Now all of a sudden you imply it is a good thing.
You bears are masters are twisting facts to suit your agenda, but you cannot fool all the people all the time. The bulls, you will never fool.

lostand confused says

The guy is a bum and gives good ranchers a bad name.

Too Late. Free Market Ranchers have been fighting for their exclusive free use of free Government Land for more than a Century against all comers.

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

"the only difference between Bundy and a whole host of conservatives is that the renegade rancher isn't sophisticated enough to couch his nonsense in soundbites and euphemism."

I'm sorry what was the question?

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!

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 ;)