patrick.net

Hit $42 last night. Pretty insane.

Back on topic.

Sarah Palin supports Trump's "birtherism".

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20052767-503544.html

In a Saturday interview on Fox News's Justice with Judge Jeanine, Palin stopped short of saying she believed the claims, but said "more power to" Trump if he wanted to use his considerable resources to look into the matter.

"He's not just throwing stones from the sidelines, he's digging in, he's paying for researchers to find out why President Obama would have spent $2 million to not show his birth certificate," Palin told host Jeanine Pirro.

"I think that he was born in Hawaii because there was the birth announcement put in the newspaper - but obviously if there's something there that the president doesn't want people to see on that birth certificate, that he's going to great lengths to make sure that it isn't shown, and that's kind of perplexing for a lot of people," she said.

Meanwhile, on ABC's "This Week" yesterday, White House senior adviser David Plouffe called Trump's recent claims "sideshow behavior" and said he had "zero chance" of being elected president.

"There may be a small part of the country that believes these things, but mainstream Americans think it's a sideshow," Plouffe said, of the birther issue. "And what they want our leaders to do is focus squarely on the issues right in front of us: how we're going to keep growing the economy...how we keep our people safe, how do we make sure we're going to win the future by focusing on things like education and innovation? So that's what they want us to focus on."

He added that he hoped Trump continued to do well in presidential straw polls.

"I saw Donald Trump kind of rising in some polls and given his behavior and spectacle the last couple of weeks, I hope he keeps on rising," Plouffe told said. "There is zero chance that Donald Trump would ever be hired by the American people to do this job."

In a recent interview with NBC News, a former Hawaiian state health official who twice reviewed Mr. Obama's birth certificate called the renewed discussion over the president's birthplace "ludicrous," and affirmed - for the third time - that that his original birth certificate was "real."

"It's kind of ludicrous at this point," said Dr. Chiyome Fukino, former director of Hawaii's Department of Health, told NBC in a phone interview.

Fukino said she has examined the president's "record of live birth" on multiple occasions. (The document circulated on the internet is Mr. Obama's "certificate of live birth," which is a shorter version of the original.) The birth certificate, she said, is kept in a bound volume in Hawaii's Department of Health, and features the signature of the doctor who delivered Mr. Obama.

If they joined forces, would it be Trump/Palin, or Palin/Trump?

Looks like Obama’s Birther strategy may pay off big time.
Here's my favorite scenario. Right after the Republican National Convention, hire Geraldo Rivera to open the file cabinets at the Hawaiian Department of Health and broadcast a live unveiling of the bound long form.

Vicente says

That's exactly how I saw Obama campaign posters.

I just saw that:

Silver Options Trader Bets $1 Million on Price Drop by July
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-11/silver-etf-options-trader-bets-1-million-on-37-slide-by-july.html

Anyone on this board, by chance?

CRB also had a bit on base metals this morning too:

Softer Commodity Prices?
http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2011/04/softer-commodity-prices.html

The copper stockpiling is an old story at this point, though.

I wonder why Google maps can’t find the address. Is it a very new development? Maybe the address doesn’t officially exist yet.

They are a weird bunch. Sometimes I think CTA is mentally on another planet and are completely out of touch with reality.

But it’s only BLOCKS from a Million Dollar House!

The funny thing is the $3T of SSI/Medicare assets are counted as part of the debt ceiling since they are government bonds.

So either this debt is bona fide obligations of the US government or we're still 2-3 years away from hitting the statutory debt limit.

The idiots on the right can't have this both ways, tho of course they try.

Shrek ... If Mumia had killed a teacher (human being) instead of a cop (brutal non-human), I wonder if the teachers would be supporting the "union supporting, pro-education, civil rights hero?"

shrekgrinch says

Yeah, because Trump gets to drive this as an independent candidate while the Reps benefit w/o risk.

If the strategy is to appear to be the lesser of two crazies, then yes Republicans will benefit. They will not benefit if the angry Tea Party denizens vote Trump as a protest vote during the general election. There is ample evidence that Tea Party voters would rather cast a vote in protest giving Obama a second term than elect a moderate Republican. Obama's Presidency has been a great recruiter for the Tea Party.

Republicans can hope Trump drops out before the general election after rallying the base and reaping the rewards, but history shows differently. Trump is an egomaniac. I don't see him dropping out and endorsing a Republican candidate late in the game.

The best thing Democrats can do at this point is help Trump. Obama should cryptically allude to the fact that his "long" form has irregularities and may be incomplete. Birthers will seize on any little "evidence" like this to support their position.

The Republicans want to straddle the fence on this as a "safe" position. The issue will only become more polarized during the election. Fence sitters like Palin are indicating a willingness to take a side which shows that fence sitting Republicans will be destroyed in the primaries.

If I were Obama, I would order the Secret Service to safeguard Hawaiian birth records and keep them secret.

shrekgrinch says

Exactly where is this ‘evidence’…especially since all the actual teabaggers I talk to say that they’d die before voting for Obama.

I'm not suggesting Tea Party members will actually vote for Obama. I'm saying they will look at the ticket - Republican or Democrat - and write in Trump as a protest vote. They know this may lead to Obama squeeking out a win, but these folks are motivated by principle. Any Republican who tries to shift towards the center will be viewed as a weak sellout.

shrekgrinch says

He doesn’t have to drop out. He can pull a Perot/Nader on Obama and in a close election, that will be enough. Rep prez candidate wins. That is a a typical consequence in a two-party system when a third party/candidate runs, as per Duverger’s Law.

I don't think Obama faces any dangers from a third party candidate despite Presidential election history. I think the Tea Party is the actual incumbant in the 2012 race and the election will be a referendum on how well they and the Republicans did at tearing down Obama's accomplishments. Because of this there is a perception that Obama is the underdog with his base. They won't abandon him. All Obama has to do is shift right politically and the Republicans will be pushed into the extremist wing as they attempt to define themselves against Obama or they will see all of their issues co-opted a la Bill Clinton master stroke. Obama is already stealing conservative issues.

When the Republican candidate is picked, there will be a massive effort to paint him or her as more left-wing than Obama (if a moderate like Mitt) or a teabagger crazy nutjob (if a conservative like Palin). Trump will only pull votes from Republicans. No Democrats will vote for Trump, even socially conservative blue collar Dems. Trump reminds people of the @sshole boss everyone ever had. Trump will be Leona Helmsly'ed by a disgruntled former employee in the same way Meg Whitman got creamed in California. He is the ideal Democratic opponent.

shrekgrinch says

2) Trump will most likely take dem votes from Obama…as he is a non-Republican who is white and hasn’t racked up over a billion dollars in just one year of deficit spending.

Really? He's not a Republican?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theticket/20110412/el_yblog_theticket/donald-trump-tops-new-2012-poll-as-he-steps-up-outreach-to-gop-conservatives

You must be living in a fantasy world if you think he will take away more Dem votes than Reps. You need to find the anchor...

thomas.wong1986 says

bubblesitter says

Same here. Been waiting since 2004. People at my work were buying left and right in 2004 and I went a different direction and I am delighted I did. Now just waiting for a true bottom.

We are pretty much at 2004 prices today. Back in 2004 and even still today way way out from the norm/bottom in prices. It was rather mindboogling how much people were bidding/buying up home in 2002-2004 for compared to 5-6 years prior.
http://www.housingbubblebust.com/OFHEO/Major/NorCal.html

here in LA we're at 2002/2003 prices...

SubOink says

here in LA we’re at 2002/2003 prices…

More like 03-04 prices....

Nathan says

I think it’s the best time to buy and flip properties now.

Works in some locations.

For Los Angeles, it works IF you get the property cheap enough AND IF you have good contractors that are relatively inexpensive.

At the moment, decently located turnkey properties with modern upgrades seem to command a strong premium and quick sale over other type properties in all non outlying areas of LA County, and even moreso in areas that are considered to be safe and have decent schools.

Most often(for LA County) this takes the form of shady insider stuff that most people don't have access to.

klarek says

SubOink says

here in LA we’re at 2002/2003 prices…

More like 03-04 prices….

Last time, I looked at homes was in 2003, I kept a lot of the listings MLS sheets and checked them out. Half of them are selling at below the asking price of 2003. 2002 prices are rare but you can find them. And some people are still in dream land asking 2004 prices (but not getting them).

If you have time to look, have a downpay and can get a loan..there are some amazing deals out there.

klarek says

More like 03-04 prices….

I shall confirm this.

Our condo originally was on the market for 140k when we got it years ago. About a year after that bubble started emerging and price went up to over 400k (it was really dumb). Today our neighbors foreclosed condo (exact same as ours) is on the market at 220k.... been there for a while with no takers. 220k in this area is a lot of money, people have metal bars on windows out here for a reason.

Prices have a lot of room to go down, because bank is certainly motivated to not keep on paying $300 HOA fee every month and god knows how much in other repairs.

SubOink says

Last time, I looked at homes was in 2003, I kept a lot of the listings MLS sheets and checked them out. Half of them are selling at below the asking price of 2003. 2002 prices are rare but you can find them. And some people are still in dream land asking 2004 prices (but not getting them).

If you have time to look, have a downpay and can get a loan..there are some amazing deals out there.

As a whole though, prices are in late 03 to early 04 territory. Anecdotal cases aside, sales above 2003 level prices are still occurring. There's certainly room for them to fall.

any thoughts on BIDU?

Generally speaking, housing prices will fall back to about the 2000 price levels because that was the last time that housing prices consumed about 38% of the average household incomes... we'd be there by now were it not for all the bubble gum policies and failed attempts to keep prices inflated... all the other stuff posted here is smoke and mirrors... the macroeconomic math for a balanced economy will eventually work out and win out... IMO, Alan Greenspan didn't understand the basic relationship between wages and prices.. even for something as important as home prices, he didn't get it... just utterly amazing to me... (frankly, I'm not sure his relief, BB, does either)...

and speaking of wages and the relationship between wages and home prices, we'll just have to see how cutting about $4-5T from the federal (bloated) budget does for jobs, wages and then home prices over the next decade... yea, that sounds like a real stimulator for increasing home prices... that should be interesting to watch play out...

so, yes, we're destined for 2000 home prices, or thereabouts.. that includes bubble locals like the Bay Area and Washington DC... of course, most of this assumes we collectively learned something about the imense hazards of massive credit bubbles that were needed to inflate housing prices to their current levels..

I don't care much for speeches, I want to see concrete written bills explaining what he will do... otherwise it is just always same old political generic crap which never materializes. I do not trust him, but I also bear no trust in Republicans either. I want to see concrete facts, right now it is just political chit chat. Everyone has friends who want their tax benefits protected on k street.

Here is Obamas speech btw:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgJiHxRv2M0

shrekgrinch says

Uh…if Trump runs, it will be as an independent despite all that you allow yourself to be programmed by the ‘unbiased’ media otherwise. I seriously doubt he’ll have that (R) next to his name even if he seriously does run.

What? Trump is a registered Republican and that's the only group he scores strongly with. The idea he would run as an independent or suck in Obama voters seems.... DAFT to put it mildly.

How about we put a bet down on this one since you are so certain.

shrekgrinch says

If the doesn’t win the primaries (not just NY but all the other states he’ll need), then running as an independent is the only option he has…the Ross Perot option.

So it's not a CHOICE, it's a backup plan. Got it.

With his blather about 25% tariffs on China he does seem to have plagiarized Perot.

I for one welcome our stern Tea Party overlords.

Anybody who flogs the 'dems vs. repubs' is the one being disingenuous. They're all hogs at the corporate trough.

sfbubblebuyer says

Anybody who flogs the ‘dems vs. repubs’ is the one being disingenuous. They’re all hogs at the corporate trough.

Agree, but the real battle is between conservative and moderate.

Not even full class warfare taxation levels can save us.

That's why Obama included spending cuts. Read the speech, this time for comprehension.

The Dems truly bankrupted us.

1) This nation is not "bankrupt". The Bush administration (and Republican congress before them) policy preferences put us on a course of disaster, but we're not quite there yet, just a bit way down the road.

Our interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan have cost us $1.3T -- Iraq alone was a $800B blunder.

The 2001-2003 tax cuts failed to create the liberated market full of capital investment, instead all that newly freed money just went into land values. I can see this now, but in 2000-2001 I had not discovered the Georgist thing so did not see beforehand this dynamic coming.

The deficit is no great mystery:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=7X

shows how the annual deficit (red line) has been increased to make up for the slack of the loss of borrrowing power in the economy.

The central, controlling fact is that the US economy hit the wall in late 2007 and is now broken.

The damage has been accruing since 1985 or so so we need more class warfare, not less, to fix it. The choice we face is liquidating the rich or liquidating the middle class.

Unfortunately the rich can hire the best and brightest to defend their interests, and much of the middle class are easily bamboozled by these lies.

The major budget-buster increases since 2007 have been welfare (up $100B), unemployment insurance (+$100B) and defense, up $300B.

unemployment is tailing off and welfare is a pretty large budget item now (total of $700B/yr at all levels, or $7000/household), but the our military is the elephant in the room here, at close to $1T/yr.

Talk about bankrupting us!

shrekgrinch says

Uh…if Trump runs, it will be as an independent despite all that you allow yourself to be programmed by the ‘unbiased’ media otherwise. I seriously doubt he’ll have that (R) next to his name even if he seriously does run. Hence why you are all confused and I am not…you actually think he’s going to run in the general election as a Republican.

Uh, my point wasn't that he'll be a Rep. The point is that he is VERY well liked by Republicans. You'll notice that he ins't among the top vote getters in Dem polls... Don't you think it logically follows that he'll get more votes from Republicans??

Ha ha, anyone who touts the recent speech/actions as "class warfare" without considering what's been happening over the past several years - shifts of massive amounts of wealth toward the top - is being disingenuou. Just a usual shreckgrinchsymdrome post, nothing to see here.

I like the idea he mentioned about fixing the tax code itemized "deductions". But without specifics there isn't much to go from.

Found a link to the proposed budget, will read later of course.

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/A_Politics/___Politics_Today_Stories_Teases/budget.pdf

It still doesn't look like redfin fixed 'that thing' where asking prices appear to spike. Just about every California market I've looked at shows a sharp turnaround EXACTLY after Jan 1, 2011. Coincidence or screwed up algorithm?

ChrisLA says

I don’t care much for speeches, I want to see concrete written bills explaining what he will do… otherwise it is just always same old political generic crap which never materializes. I do not trust him, but I also bear no trust in Republicans either. I want to see concrete facts, right now it is just political chit chat.

Agreed.