patrick.net

> Not the kind of place I would ever buy.

Thanks for your comments.
Why not, though? By your own estimates ("I wouldn’t be surprised if you could get $2200-2400"), it appears to offer higher ROI % that some of your properties reported here.

Yey. Apocalypse is back. Actually I'll plant sweet potatoes.

bubblesitter says

Fed should seriously start planning on getting some ink and paper from China for QE4.

It may just be the whisky doing the thinking for me tonight, but I think I have a brilliant idea. Let us outsource the fucking Fed to China and get _them_ to print the damn money themselves. Saves a lot of time and trouble since they are going to get the money anyway... Bernanke can go fuck himself for 99 weeks on unemployment.

native94027 says

bubblesitter says

Fed should seriously start planning on getting some ink and paper from China for QE4.

It may just be the whisky doing the thinking for me tonight, but I think I have a brilliant idea. Let us outsource the fucking Fed to China and get _them_ to print the damn money themselves. Saves a lot of time and trouble since they are going to get the money anyway… Bernanke can go fuck himself for 99 weeks on unemployment.

you go to the front of the class

Bap33 says

native94027 says

bubblesitter says

Fed should seriously start planning on getting some ink and paper from China for QE4.

It may just be the whisky doing the thinking for me tonight, but I think I have a brilliant idea. Let us outsource the fucking Fed to China and get _them_ to print the damn money themselves. Saves a lot of time and trouble since they are going to get the money anyway… Bernanke can go fuck himself for 99 weeks on unemployment.

you go to the front of the class

Actually this has already been happening. The reason the People's Bank of China has $2.5T of money-good assets under its wing is because it forcibly confiscates all USDs China's exporters receive for their goods, and prints the yuan in exchange.

Or so I've read (IIRC this is one of Peter Schiff's theses). Obviously there is outward loss of USD as China makes import purchases, but that's the general pattern since the mid-90s.

Tenouncetrout says

CNN.COM had the stones to print that “70%” of real estate is afordable.
Afordable for whom, Foreigners?

70% is affordable for dual income households willing to invest every penny they have into a mortgage. Not to mention their hip hop thug children, left alone to raise themselves while momma works at the office.

It's very comforting to know that Patrick (influenced by that Duck Dude I presume) has changed the name from "Housing Crash Forum” to the much more optimistic “Housing Market Forum.” It sounds so much better. Unfortunately, prices are still crashing.

http://www.doctorhousingbubble.com/7-charts-showing-a-10-to-15-percent-decline-in-home-prices-for-u-s-housing-in-2011/?source=patrick.net

Clarence 13X says

Tenouncetrout says

CNN.COM had the stones to print that “70%” of real estate is afordable.
Afordable for whom, Foreigners?

70% is affordable for dual income households willing to invest every penny they have into a mortgage. Not to mention their hip hop thug children, left alone to raise themselves while momma works at the office.

100% agree

Troy ... from the article:

"In a separate report today, the Realtors group said U.S. sales tumbled 25 percent to a 4.16 million seasonally adjusted annual pace in the third quarter from the previous three months. The pace was 21 percent below the 5.28 million rate of the year- earlier period."

A 25% drop in sales from a previous bad sales year doesn't translate into higher prices in the future. Without adequate sales activity needed to burn through the excess (as in huge) inventory, prices will continue to be stagnant at best, with the likelihood of decreasing prices remaining high. With all this "good news," keep in mind the millions of homes in the shadow inventory that the banks are withholding from the market in order to prevent the supply from decreasing values even further. No matter how you look at it, home prices will be pressured via market forces in a downward direction for years to come.

RayAmerica says

A 25% drop in sales from a previous bad sales year doesn’t translate into higher prices in the future.

Was 2009 a bad housing year? I thought prices generally rose in '09.

RayAmerica says

Without adequate sales activity needed to burn through the excess (as in huge) inventory, prices will continue to be stagnant at best, with the likelihood of decreasing prices remaining high

Agreed. I think sales activity is already rising and will continue to slowly rise making your point moot.

RayAmerica says

With all this “good news,” keep in mind the millions of homes in the shadow inventory that the banks are withholding from the market in order to prevent the supply from decreasing values even further.

Ah, yes. The infamous shadow inventory. Banks for some reason didn't put all this inventory on the market in 2009 while prices were rising... It's the boogeyman hiding in the closet waiting to bite unsuspecting buyers.

RayAmerica says

No matter how you look at it, home prices will be pressured via market forces in a downward direction for years to come.

Speak for yourself Ray..

robertoaribas says

Supply and demand are forward looking… and both are against you at this point in time. Year over year SALES is indicative of demand… and forward looking in terms of price.

Year over year numbers are most definitely NOT forward looking. Month to month numbers are better but not great. Look at pending sales or mortgage applications. Those are actual forward looking statistics.

robertoaribas says

Once again, you must be going to lose your A$$ if prices drop. You aren’t stupid enough to believe what you write, so it must be an emotional response.

Wow--it must be nice to live in such an insulated world where you know everything before it happens. You do understand that sales activity has been picking up in the last few months after a sharp drop when the credit ended, right? If anyone is acting emotionally, it's you...

robertoaribas says

good grief! sales number tell us how many people are buying now! of course this gives us an idea of current, or worst case, 45 day ago, demand

Wait a second. I thought the Case Shiller numbers were still being influenced by the housing credit that expired in April because there were a good number of 180+ day closings... Which is it?

Sales number typicall come out a couple of weeks after the month ended and reflect offers accepted 30-60 days ago. That is not a forward number. That's 2 month+ old data.

We definitely don't need you arguing our case. Thanks for trying though

robertoaribas says

tapa butie: are you pretending to be stupid? or are you actually really stupid?
Case-Shiller = price data
Sales rates are how many are selling.
Now, if 99% of all buyers drop dead tomorrow, the prices of all the listings, nor the prior months sales, are not going to change over night. BUT the number of transactions, in the following week and month after their mass death, I’m going to go out on a limb here, and say the number of sales might drop.
I am beginning to understand the nature of why you and I argue: you are clueless, and I have a large background in economics and math…
when the SALES drop to a lower number, this implies less demand, which implies that prices will drop down the line…
My case stands: LAST years sales were higher than they should have been, due to the perceived end of the buyer’s credit; So 20% down year over year might not be as bad as it implies… Once again, this probably went over your head.

Roberto--Obviously you are not getting it. If a drop in sales correlates to a price drop down the line, then a rise in pending sales and mortgage applications will result in higher sales down the line and higher prices even further down the line.

I'm not sure how much more clear I can be. Someone with your background in statistics and math surely can understand that, right?

tatupu70 says

Ah, yes. The infamous shadow inventory. Banks for some reason didn’t put all this inventory on the market in 2009 while prices were rising… It’s the boogeyman hiding in the closet waiting to bite unsuspecting buyers.

Check out the "boogeyman" by going here:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/164044-the-impact-of-residential-real-estates-shadow-inventory-on-housing

tatupu70 says

I think sales activity is already rising and will continue to slowly rise making your point moot.

Incredible. You didn't even take the time to read the article I posted, and yet you have the audacity to comment on it. If you would take the time to read it, you'd notice that it clearly states sales activity is not "rising" as you claim, but in fact, it is dropping. Change the flavor of the Kool-Aid you're drinking. The one you're on now is killing brain cells by the billions.

RayAmerica says

Incredible. You didn’t even take the time to read the article I posted, and yet you have the audacity to comment on it. If you would take the time to read it, you’d notice that it clearly states sales activity is not “rising” as you claim, but in fact, it is dropping. Change the flavor of the Kool-Aid you’re drinking. The one you’re on now is killing brain cells by the billions.

I read it. It says that activity has dropped YOY. I was refering to more recent data...

robertoaribas says

yes, tapa bootie: and mortgage applications to BUY homes are about 20% below last year, about 30% below where they were the entire quarter, before the home buying credit ended.
SO, thank you for bringing up more data that supports the premise, home prices are more likely to fall in most areas, then they are to rise.
Your last post bring you up a notch in my book. You are now at notch 1!

Roberto--I'm clearly not getting through to you. I'm well aware that sales are off YOY. I don't care anymore--that's old news. I'm more concerned with where prices are going in the future and what the current trend is in sales activity.

There are two possible scenarios in my opinion. The one that most here believe is that housing prices never found their bottom and that the credit simply delayed the end of the crash. Once it ended the crash would resume. But the one that I think is equally plausible is that the housing credit had a small effect, but that the crash was mostly over by the time the credit ended. In that case, there would be a drop in sales activity as the end of the credit would certainly pull ahead some demand, but the normal sales activity would resume after a few months.

I don't think it's clear yet which scenario is correct, but that's why I'm more concerned with forward looking data than YOY numbers.

tatupu70 says

The one that most here believe is that housing prices never found their bottom and that the credit simply delayed the end of the crash. Once it ended the crash would resume

And so it continues....

Press Releases
Home Values Near Unprecedented Decline as Hints of Stabilization Wane in Third Quarter
Percentage of Homeowners Underwater Reaches New Peak; Length and Depth of Housing Downturn Approach Depression-Era Declines According to Q3 2010 Zillow® Real Estate Market Reports

"While not unexpected, the unceasing declines in home values signal that we're in for a long, bleak winter of continued troubles for the housing market," said Zillow Chief Economist Dr. Stan Humphries. "The length and depth of the current housing recession is rivaling the Great Depression's real estate downturn, and, with encouraging signs fading, will easily eclipse it in the coming months.

Anyway! its just a correction as some say "crash" that has been long long over due ...

Zlxr says

Roberto - do you think it’s possible that the really rich investor groups who are buying blocks of houses for pennies on the dollar (ie - the friends of the Banks) will continue as the Banks speed up the foreclosures?

If a bank's executives arranged an insider deal to sell an asset for pennies on the dollar (assuming that there were a higher price available on the open market) then they would be in violation of their duty to the banks shareholders and in violation of a number of laws and sec regulations. If you are aware of this actually happening report it now.

Zlxr says

The only thing I heard (from a Bankruptcy Lawyer back in 2007) was that there were investors who were buying groups of homes for somewhere between 30 - 50 cents on the dollar. He said these homes never make it to the courthouse steps.

you can check out the reo sites... bankofamerica.reo.com and reo.wachovia.com or whatever. these don't have jack. Clearly they are selling to "professional" investors before the public. Doesn't everything work that way? Even the job postings in big corps don't make it to the careers website unless no H1 and no internal candidate is available. Its not where you look but who you know. Heck, I used to try to do government contract bids in SC. Out of 7 I was low bidder on 2. And i was a local company. Still never got a contract. Finally, I heard the head of purchasing told an entrepreneur group that unless he knew them personally they would never get a contract with the State of SC. That's how business really works.

maxweber says

I reckon that suggests housing is not at bottom since money supply is drying up and the bulk of the “new” money is going into black hole accounts.

That's exactly where the TARP money went, into the "black hole" to balance out the toxic loans the banksters are holding. All those Kool-Aid drinkers (I Love My Government) were duped into thinking it was designed to increase liquidity in order to get the economy moving again, when in fact, it was nothing other than a pay-back for all the banksters & Wall Street thugs misdeeds. What’s worse is that both parties were complicit in this illegal transfer of wealth.

SF ace says

Google only looks at resume with a minimum 3.5 GPA at a stanford level institution regardless of experience, otherwise, forget about it.

I have a dozen friends at google, including one of the founding engineers. I can assure that is not the case, a few of them never attended college at all.

Google management is not stupid. They're after talent, regardless of formal education level.

Feb. 1st, 2013

Once we get past Dec. 2012 it's a new world baby! Whether you believe that the Mayans used Microsoft Exchange (EOL=12/21/2012) or not the lifting of that psychological vial will have some positive effect on housing. We will also be just over 4yrs out from August (Sept. for those that want to ignore what was happening in the month before the fall) 2008. 4yrs is a good timeframe for starting to forget the past.

tarkin says

Feb. 1st, 2013
Once we get past Dec. 2012 it’s a new world baby! Whether you believe that the Mayans used Microsoft Exchange (EOL=12/21/2012) or not the lifting of that psychological vial will have some positive effect on housing. We will also be just over 4yrs out from August (Sept. for those that want to ignore what was happened the month before the fall) 2008. 4yrs is a good timeframe for starting to forget the past.

And, most importantly, we would likely have a brand-new US president!

Fisk says

we would likely have a brand-new US president!

because the republicans did such a good job 2001-2008?

Good job destroying the country.

What a fucking clown you are.

Fisk says

How has O measured to FDR so far?

FDR was willing to go hammer & tongs against his opponents. He also had IMMENSE -- and secure -- majorities in the Congress, not this 60% shit in the Senate that was chock full of DINOs like Lieberman and Baucus.

Democrats went from 39 Senate / 164 House in 1928 to a 48/217 (perfectly even) split in 1930 to a 59 / 311 majority in 1932 and even larger 69 / 322 mandate after 1934.

BHO is slightly reticent and I think he understands that his skin color and "community organizer" history and the general media environment make it difficult for him to be anything close to the class fighter of FDR's calibre. FDR could be FDR just like "only Nixon could go to China".

Obama didn't have the congressional support he needed (in the Senate), given the weak and unsteady majorities his party received in 2008. We lost a lot of the DINOs in conservative districts this election and for the most part I'm going to miss them because they at least voted better than their Republican replacements will. The conservative bloc in this country is not going away off into that good night like it did in 1933-37. They're doubling down on the crazy, instead. FDR also had the cushion of the party loyalty of all the racist fuckheads in the south, the Dems have lost these guys and have since the Nixon realignment of 1972.

Fisk says

What you seem to forget about FDR is that he wasn’t at all shy about using the US military for what it does best

And what you seem to forget is that FDR maneuvered the US's enemies into initiating hostilities first. Preemptive war has a way of backfiring on its perpetrators. Just ask Hitler.

Troy says

And what you seem to forget is that FDR maneuvered the US’s enemies into initiating hostilities first. Preemptive war has a way of backfiring on its perpetrators. Just ask Hitler.

Exactly. But he abundantly used those opportunities when presented.
US adversaries do more than enough "initiating", and, had FDR been president instead of the other (D)s in 1968 and 1979, we would most likely not be faced today with intractable problems in (1) N. Korea and (2) Iran. Because of (1) Pueblo incident and (2) embassy hostage situation. Both were world-class casus belli that were wasted.

Fisk says

Both were world-class casus belli that were wasted.

You really don't know WTF you're talking about. FDR already had a similar casus belli to the Pueblo, it was the Reuben James in Oct 1941 with Hitler and the Panay in 1937.

Casus belli for real war is shit like the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbor.

Fisk says

Troy says

And what you seem to forget is that FDR maneuvered the US’s enemies into initiating hostilities first. Preemptive war has a way of backfiring on its perpetrators. Just ask Hitler.

Exactly. But he abundantly used those opportunities when presented.

US adversaries do more than enough “initiating”, and, had FDR been president instead of the other (D)s in 1968 and 1979, we would most likely not be faced today with intractable problems in (1) N. Korea and (2) Iran. Because of (1) Pueblo incident and (2) embassy hostage situation. Both were world-class casus belli that were wasted.

You are both totally clueless. FDR was irrelevant to either the German or Japanese war plans. Attack NK in 1968 in the middle of the Vietnam war? Terrific plan. How exactly did we plan on not fighting the Chinese after invading NK again. Ever hear of the Korean war? How would Korean war II work out any better? Run an invasion force up the Persian Gulf right through the Straight of Hormuz. Great plan. Military genius at work. Do you guys have absolutely any knowledge about military history or planning at all? Amazing.

bob2356 says

Fisk says

Troy says

And what you seem to forget is that FDR maneuvered the US’s enemies into initiating hostilities first. Preemptive war has a way of backfiring on its perpetrators. Just ask Hitler.

Exactly. But he abundantly used those opportunities when presented.
US adversaries do more than enough “initiating”, and, had FDR been president instead of the other (D)s in 1968 and 1979, we would most likely not be faced today with intractable problems in (1) N. Korea and (2) Iran. Because of (1) Pueblo incident and (2) embassy hostage situation. Both were world-class casus belli that were wasted.

You are both totally clueless. FDR was irrelevant to either the German or Japanese war plans. Attack NK in 1968 in the middle of the Vietnam war? Terrific plan. How exactly did we plan on not fighting the Chinese after invading NK again. Ever hear of the Korean war? How would Korean war II work out any better? Run an invasion force up the Persian Gulf right through the Straight of Hormuz. Great plan. Military genius at work. Do you guys have absolutely any knowledge about military history or planning at all? Amazing.

Yes. I guess FDR had none either, nor unfortunately had an opportunity to retain your services. Else he would have sure concluded that:
1. Getting involved in Europe in the middle of war with Japan? Insane.
2. Sending a fleet with hardly any fighter cover against Jap. carrier force at Midway? Criminal.
3. A bombing raid on Tokyo with no way to return to the carrier? Madness.
4. Running an invasion force up English Channel in front of German artillery, on the beaches strenuously fortified over 4 years? Are you off your meds?

It's truly a sad commentary on modern America that the starving NK hamlet appears a more formidable enemy than Japan in 1941 that owned nearly all Pacific and could attack on the US territory at will, while the "great and proud Iranian nation" of A-jad (with the highest achievement of possibly copying over 20 years what we did 70 years ago in 4 years, and using our stolen technology and parts) is mightier than Germany in control of about all Europe and largely Atlantic up to the US shores in addition.

Fisk says

is mightier than Germany in control of about all Europe and largely Atlantic up to the US shores in addition

the question is not whether we could win, but with what means, and what the afterwar would be like.

You can't wipe out 70M people without some boomerang effects.

That was what tied our hands in Vietnam, too. Escalation is a two-way street. Never be the first to escalate.

Troy says

You can’t wipe out 70M people without some boomerang effects.

I don't want them to be wiped out, even if we could. Not any more than 80 mln. Germans. I want them to be invaded and occupied, then:

Watch all Khomeini portraits in the trash heaps and a few of their sacred ayatollahs and VEVAK and Rev. guards bosses publicly tried
as in Nuremberg and decapitated on the gallows a la Saddam and his henchmen
Military, Rev. guards, and basij disbanded and outlawed, as in Germany after WWII
All military, MIC, and nuclear facilities destroyed or removed
New secular constitution, laws, and govt. instituted and islam removed from public sphere and educational institutions
Rabid nationalistic and antisemitic propaganda banned, again as in Germany after WWII
Regime crimes widely aired and repudiated
Political prisoners released, rehabilitated, and compensated
"Forcibly convert them all into christianity" (C, Ann Coulter). Just kidding :-), some modicum of liberal democracy would be fine.

New secular Iran be a friend and ally of US and perhaps NATO member, such as Germany, Japan, Italy, etc.

^ Ok, that's entirely on the model of our postwar WW2 successes.

The problem was though that Iraq was the same neocon fever dream -- let's go in and liberate these people.

Sometimes people don't want to be liberated, and the history between the US and Iran really isn't all that hot, what with our previous interventions in the 20th century and support of a dictator guy they really didn't like.

The problem with intervention in these cases is that everybody you kill just creates 10-20 more resistance fighters.

This was the dynamic in Vietnam and Iraq, and this cycle of violence is still going on in Afghanistan.

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/05/military_afghanistan_civilian_casualties_053010w/

Fisk says

Troy says

You can’t wipe out 70M people without some boomerang effects.

I don’t want them to be wiped out, even if we could. Not any more than 80 mln. Germans. I want them to be invaded and occupied, then:
New secular Iran be a friend and ally of US and perhaps NATO member, such as Germany, Japan, Italy, etc.

While your ideas seem fine and well-intentioned, you seem to forget an important fundamental problem:
Iran, Pakistan and North Korea are ALL fronts for Chinese aggression against the strategic interests of the United States.

The PRC has been at war against the US for several decades on several fronts - and they have cultivated not only proxy regimes in those countries, but have also cultivated enough 5th columnists (media, academics, policy, business and political) within the US whose short-term personal interests are leveraged at the expense of long-term US strategic interest. This has been going on so long that the ONLY people who don't recognize it are the American sheeple who are drinking Brawndo (tm) and watching 'Reality' TV while their future is being sold out from under their fat asses.

native94027 says

Fisk says

Troy says

You can’t wipe out 70M people without some boomerang effects.

I don’t want them to be wiped out, even if we could. Not any more than 80 mln. Germans. I want them to be invaded and occupied, then:
New secular Iran be a friend and ally of US and perhaps NATO member, such as Germany, Japan, Italy, etc.

While your ideas seem fine and well-intentioned, you seem to forget an important fundamental problem:
Iran, Pakistan and North Korea are ALL fronts for Chinese aggression against the strategic interests of the United States.
The PRC has been at war against the US for several decades on several fronts - and they have cultivated not only proxy regimes in those countries, but have also cultivated enough 5th columnists (media, academics, policy, business and political) within the US whose short-term personal interests are leveraged at the expense of long-term US strategic interest. This has been going on so long that the ONLY people who don’t recognize it are the American sheeple who are drinking Brawndo ™ and watching ‘Reality’ TV while their future is being sold out from under their fat asses.

I think this is way to simplistic, and frankly resembles the stories of "zionist conspiracy to control the world".
NK is on its face a PRC client since its birth, though not exactly a puppet. Islamic Iran and Pakistan came into being with no PRC effort whatsoever and are by no means proxies, though they coooperate on some things. The main binder between Paki and PRC is shared animosity to India rather than anything to do with US, but PRC is extremely concerned about the growing Islamic insurgency and terrorism in its turkish-populated Western regions (Urumchi etc.) and thus quite leary of fundamentalist islamic movements and states. Historically, Paki has been a US client far more than that of PRC, at least until a couple years ago.

Anyhow, my point re: Iran holds regardless of the degree of friendship between them and PRC.

Fisk says

Yes. I guess FDR had none either, nor unfortunately had an opportunity to retain your services. Else he would have sure concluded that:
1. Getting involved in Europe in the middle of war with Japan? Insane.
2. Sending a fleet with hardly any fighter cover against Jap. carrier force at Midway? Criminal.
3. A bombing raid on Tokyo with no way to return to the carrier? Madness.
4. Running an invasion force up English Channel in front of German artillery, on the beaches strenuously fortified over 4 years? Are you off your meds?

It’s truly a sad commentary on modern America that the starving NK hamlet appears a more formidable enemy than Japan in 1941 that owned nearly all Pacific and could attack on the US territory at will, while the “great and proud Iranian nation” of A-jad (with the highest achievement of possibly copying over 20 years what we did 70 years ago in 4 years, and using our stolen technology and parts) is mightier than Germany in control of about all Europe and largely Atlantic up to the US shores in addition.

Your knowledge of history seems to be cursory at best.
We weren't in the middle of a war with Japan. We put most of America's resources into Europe first. The pacific war was secondary for well over a year.
We had full knowledge of Japanese ship movements during the battles of Midway. The Japanese had 4 carriers to the Americans 3, America actually had more aircraft.
Doolittle's force had made arrangements to land in China. They thought they were discovered and launched early putting the original landing areas out of range.
Again thanks to reading the enemies coded messages the Normandy invasion was a known entity.

Fisk says

I don’t want them to be wiped out, even if we could. Not any more than 80 mln. Germans. I want them to be invaded and occupied,

I'm not hearing an practical suggestions on how to make it possible for America to invade and occupy a country the size of Iran. Do I hear the words military draft? How about tax increase to pay for it? How about the word rationing, especially since we will most certainly lose a big chunk of our oil supply?

bob2356 says

Your knowledge of history seems to be cursory at best.
We weren’t in the middle of a war with Japan. We put most of America’s resources into Europe first. The pacific war was secondary for well over a year.

: ) This is not entirely true. The Army and USAAF didn't really have much to do other than expand its ranks and train up for the first two years of the war. We knocked over N Africa, Sicily, and S Italy, but these were the low-hanging fruits in Europe. The Big Game was Normandy, and we put that off for a year, partially because we were having so much fun in the Pacific.

The Navy was given its head to do what it could in the Pacific and we were committed to parallel tracks.

Of course, the entire economy was devoted to these two completely separate wars. Perhaps a similar full-scale devotion to paying down the debt would also work well.

Imagine an economy where we had to export everything we made : )

bob2356 says

I’m not hearing an practical suggestions on how to make it possible for America to invade and occupy a country the size of Iran. Do I hear the words military draft? How about tax increase to pay for it? How about the word rationing, especially since we will most certainly lose a big chunk of our oil supply?

Sure:

1. No draft needed. "Foreign legion" a la Francaise - the best solution to solve both our military manpower needs (within constrained budgets) and illegal immigration problem. Any illegal, otherwise meeting the enlistment requirements, can enlist for a period of 5 years and get a green card for self and immediate family after honorable service for that time or first major combat wound. Others to be subject to much more severe enforcement (as per the AZ law) ending in inevitable deportation.
Let's count: ~15 M illegals in the US, of which ~3 M in the 18 - 30 age group. Of those ~50% (actually, a bit more) are males, so 1.5 M. Let's say only 1/3 enlist, that's 500 K available manpower. Some women can enlist too, so say total of 600 K. All get just the basic wage, no 100 K contractors and 50 K bonuses as in Iraq. So should be not that expensive.

With another ~200 K from regular existing forces (preferably those withdrawn from Iraq with relevant experience), that would be 800 K or 5 times what we had in Iraq at the surge peak. Should suffice, I think.

If not, can bring some more enlistees from South America, Russia etc. under the same program. This is not a one-time thing: by still being a top immigration destination for aspirants from 3rd-world nations, most of which are young men, USA has an essentially UNLIMITED reserve of military manpower that anyone save China can't match.

2. Lose a big chunk of oil supply by taking over the 2nd-biggest world oil exporter? :-)
An invasion of Iran would naturally start from Iraqi territory and/or landings from the gulf, where most Iranian oil wells and facilities are close to the Iraqi border and/or the shore. Those should naturally be commandeered to supply oil to the US without charge, thus greatly expanding rather than contracting our supply. Some peace-loving Iran-coddling countries in Europe that presently feed on that supply would suffer though - that would be an added benefit. But we can nicely sell some to them to cover other expenses, provided of course that they support the whole thing at least verbally.

That's what we should have done in Iraq - I still can't figure why we didn't and that truly is an unexcusable blunder of Bush and his presidency.
USA as an OPEC member - wouldn't that be nice for a change? :-)

Fisk says

With another ~200 K from regular existing forces (preferably those withdrawn from Iraq with relevant experience), that would be 800 K or 5 times what we had in Iraq at the surge peak. Should suffice, I think.

So we will invade and occupy a country as large as the entire US east of the Mississippi river with a population of 70 million people with 800k troops. Do you actually own a map of the middle east? Iraq is 1/4 the size of Iran. Plus entire Iraq population of of 30 million (one third of the size of Iran if you don't count the Kurds who were on our side) is in a narrow band alongside the Tigris and Euphrates rivers making it effectively a much much smaller country than even that. I really want some of what you are smoking.

IFisk says

Lose a big chunk of oil supply by taking over the 2nd-biggest world oil exporter? :-)
An invasion of Iran would naturally start from Iraqi territory and/or landings from the gulf, where most Iranian oil wells and facilities are close to the Iraqi border and/or the shore. Those should naturally be commandeered to supply oil to the US without charge, thus greatly expanding rather than contracting our supply.

How do you propose to transport this oil? The straights of hormuz are over 1000 miles from the Iraqi border. It took 4 weeks to get to Baghdad less than half that distance. The world would not be too pleased to have the straights closed for 8 weeks while the US army fights it's way there. Again you keep ignoring the small fact that if there is any threat at all (aka one single cruise missile anywhere in Iran) tankers are NOT going through. No ships captain is going to ride a giant floating bomb through a war zone. If nothing else the insurance carriers will cancel their policies. I suppose the US navy could just commander the tankers and sail them. This would of course be piracy since there are no US flagged supertankers. Details like international law don't seem to be of concern to you however.

Are you actually serious with this stuff or are you just pulling everyone's chain?