patrick.net

Peter P.,

Most people I know who are Libertarians are opinionated and feel quite free to speak them. Not voicing your concerns about government wrongdoing is a pretty dangerous thing, IMHO. Democracies require that people do put checks on government.

Anyway, one of my favorite "Better Know a District" segments, with Congressman Lynn Westmoreland:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=xzeYVKuL_LY

Gotta weigh in with SFWoman on the free speech issue. Free speech is just that --the right to be a complete asshole if you want to and say things that make other people uncomfortable. And it's essential that it be protected for any functioning democracy. Otherwise, what good is it? Every country protects the right to *socially acceptable* and *polite* speech, even the Taliban. Of course, that's as long as the Taliban gets to determine what constitutes *socially acceptable* speech.

Oh, and I agree there are extremists on either end of the spectrum that want to crush it --PC lefties that don't want any "minority" group offended, and RaptureReady types that don't want us to read any book other than the Bible.

How desperate can they possibly get? This would actually be a great deal if the bankruptcy laws were more lenient. Live free for 2 years and then declare bankruptcy! Rinse and repeat!

Of course, sometimes there are negative legal consequences for saying things that cause harm to other people --such as slander, libel & physical threats. But aside from that, you're still free to be a complete asshole. And that's the way it should be.

But aside from that, you’re still free to be a complete asshole.

I agree. Animals have no rights! ;)

allah,

Kind of wondered about that one myself. It's plastered all over C/L! What's odd, with all the saber rattling about mortgage fraud is that this guy is very openly offering HUGE "cash back" offers! Now that this has been properly identified for what it is (blatant theft) the last refuge of the specuvestor has been shut off.

The pictures make it look very nice though, thanks.

Completely OT, but Microsoft has really cool birds-eye photos from 4 angles for most of the Bay Area. I don't know how long it has been there, but it is new to me. It is really cool, so I thougth I'd share:

http://maps.live.com/

You can really get a good view of the neighborhoods in San Francisco.

The pictures it has of shoreline amp shows a concert in progress:

http://tinyurl.com/32f2ce

From the casey thing:

Nigel, yes you can definitely publish. I sent the following message to
Keith of HousingBubble and louminatti guy too. And I posted a comment on Robert Cote's blog. That should be enough to let people know what's going on.

Robert has a blog?

Here’s the full story on why Casey’s site is down…

Casey's site is not down, I've just been there.

DinOR,

Yes, I picked that up from C/L. I read into it and they have 3 different plans. The first plan is no payments and no taxes for 4 years. Now had I not any assets or excellent credit, I would have been all over this like hair on a
gorilla! 4 years free living and then just walk away!

allah,

It's just incredible the lengths people are going to keep "this thing of ours" alive isn't it? The rental guarantees are pretty hysterical too! Like getting decent long term renters is as easy as calling room service? Oh this I GOTTA see.

I don't get that ad.

What's the upside for the seller?

Even if the current administration is guilty of suppressing the truth, it is a far cry from the repression experienced by, say, a political dissident in a Chinese prison.

Whoa, easy there. This is bordering on Godwin's Law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

That's like saying "Well, compared to the Sun, there's no global warming here."

A better comparison would be USA 2007 vs... say USA 1997... or even USA 1987.

I don’t get that ad.

What’s the upside for the seller?

The seller gets the place sold. What they do is sign you up for a loan that is larger than the purchase price (enough to carry mortgage and taxes for 2 or 4 years). That extra money that you get back (which is really more money that you borrowed), you put aside in an account to make the payments. It's just another way of getting you to overpay for the place, but seem like it's a great deal. It's not, but if you don't have anything to lose, you can just walk away at the end of the free period....but then again, if you don't have good credit, they probably can't get you that deal. A deal like this would appeal to the how-much-a-month crowd; the whole thing is a fraud, it's amazing that they haven't been busted yet.

SP,

Tee shirt man was crude, but there's the slippery slope issue. I normally find the slippery slope argument annoying, but I do think that is how our particular society could evolve into one in which the only free speech would be that which agrees with the administration's, or is politically correct. Accusing people of being unpatriotic or of endangering our society because they don't agree with the government is definitely a suppression of dissent.

I've seen perma-bulls do that on this site. "Why do you want the country to fall to ruin by wishing for a housing crash?" or the attempted shame "You renters are just jealous at everybody else's good fortune in the real estate run up." Or the pegging you as an outsider "What, you don't want/need to be part of the American Dream(TM)? What's wrong with you?"

I say when we see the thought/speech police come out for any reason, be they fascists or politically correct types (who I am sure are using their PC ideology more for personal gain than any sort of real equality fix) we call them on it.

SFWoman,

your point is well taken. What's wrong with a little bit of disagreement? This was set up as a democracy.

Free markets can't operate without bulls and bears anyway.

Rome was set up as a republic, just like the US (even if their ideas about citizenship were different). Mind you, look at what happened to Rome in the long run...

SP Says:

> I saw in Valley Fair wearing a “shut up
> b*tch” t-shirt. SFWoman Says:

Then SF Woman Says:

> SP, Tee shirt man was crude, but there’s the slippery
> slope issue. I normally find the slippery slope argument
> annoying, but I do think that is how our particular society
> could evolve into one in which the only free speech would
> be that which agrees with the administration’s, or is
> politically correct.

Not to pick on Raider fans today, but last season at a Raider Game I saw a “I Left the Bitch at Home” T-Shirt and on the way out of the parking lot I saw a guy on a Harley with an “If You Can Read This, The Bitch Fell Off” T-Shirt…

I am not offended by anything (many people have tried to come up with something, but I really don’t care what others do, wear or say). I just wish that people would worry more about their own life and do their own research (so they can worry less about people that tell them real estate always goes up, or a stock is a “sure winner”)…

Rome was set up as a republic, just like the US (even if their ideas about citizenship were different). Mind you, look at what happened to Rome in the long run…

Uh, did you just copy this from the comment thread in Ben's blog?

Comparing Rome to the US is one of the most ridiculous things I've heard today. I'm not saying that we're in better shape, or worse shape, but they're completely different.

Since you’re obviously familiar with Godwin’s law, the irony should be self-evident. :-)

Touche!

tsusiat,

I love a good spirited, well thought out debate. I get annoyed when an opinion different than that of the other person's automatically qualifies you as 'unpatriotic', 'anti-Semitic', 'racist','intolerant', etc. PCism becomes a rather blunt instrument with which to club people as easily as fascism or wielding the bible as a weapon.

We are finally getting some rain here. I was starting to get worried about the water situation in the country.

I recommend these t-shirts.

FAB

I think it was around the year that I struggled through Atlas Shrugged for the first time that I stopped blaming others and took full responsibility for everything that happens in my life…

You are more likely an Objectivist than a Libertarian. Ayn despised Libertarians, calling them pseudo-intellectual cranks, or conservatives disposed to engaging in various vices.

The problem with today's Libertarians, and I've met quite a few (and disposed one from elected city office when I lived in Belmont) is that they are often nothing more than overly intelligent narcissists in political ideologists clothing.

TJ Rogers came to speak to us back in B-School. Our prof introduced him as a Libertarian, and he almost ripped the poor guys spine out on the spot. It was around then I realized that hardcore Objectivists -- the ones who actually read and got Ayn -- would rather all the Libertarians would pack up and go join whichever party they're hiding from.

overly intelligent narcissists in political ideologists clothing

Ooooh. It gives me shivers when you talk like that, baby ....

Ooooh. It gives me shivers when you talk like that, baby ….

Sorry, suffering serious blog burnout. I inadvertently pissed off an entire online computer game cult get-rich-quick phenomenon by something I wrote on my blog, and I've been under attack for the last few days. Lesson: people don't like having their bubbles burst, no matter what those bubbles are.

eburbed,

if you aren't aware of the numerous parallels between the constitutional aims of your founding fathers and the principles they drew from the Roman Republic, I suggest you google those phrases - Rome, founding fathers, republic.

Then I suggest you read some translations of Livy, and follow that up with a translation of Suetonius' 12 Caesars. If you don't see the parallels between the behaviour of some of the caesars and some recent presidents, post back with your own interpretation and/or analogy.

Or you could read this:

http://www.newstatesman.co.uk/200308250013

And no, I don't pay any attention to Ben, and have no clue about his blog.

And what exactly is wrong with referring to Rome in a blog that mentions "caveat emptor" as the topic, anyway?

danville woman,

Floating Rate funds have a tendency to be quite a bit more labor intensive. Because these don't really "trade" they are illiqiud and each loan has to be screened, analyzed, selected and monitored.

The asset class as a whole is fairly new (late 80's) and up until maybe 2003 had "quarterly redemption windows". Now with daily liquidity they have become much more accessible (and useful) to retail investors. Typically they track LIBOR rates. The expenses DO look high and with that kind of yield my guess is that their is a fair amount of leverage AND junk in their too? (Peter P help me out here)

Loans default. It's part of the business. One of three ways to go here. Lower expenses and run the risk of higher default rates OR! 2) staff up and scrutinize the hell out of 'em and brag that while you have lower yields "you've never had to eat a default!" (Institutions love that pitch).

The 3rd option is to sell off anything that looks like it's struggling (airlines, telecom) but when you go this "my hands are clean" route you're not going to be around when they liquidate assets. Remember these are Senior Subordinated Loans so after Uncle Sam and the "help" you are next in line!

My question is, now that the big move is basically over and no clear consenus on the Fed's next move are you encountering opportunity cost?

Someone? Anyone?

Update on my friend who is trying to sell her house in Cupertino...

The house was on the market last fall/winter and did not sell. I didn't realize this, but my friend told me that she received numerous "low ball" offers ranging from $50k to $20k off the asking price. She did not accept any of these offers. She was getting ready to relist, when the couple who had offered her $20k off last year made the same offer. She turned them down again. They then offered her asking price, which she is going to accept (even though Spring is going to be a seller's market in Cupertino, according to her). It comes as no surprise that the family is buying for the school district.

Randy H,

You mean "virtual whores" can be vindictive?

They then offered her asking price, which she is going to accept (even though Spring is going to be a seller’s market in Cupertino, according to her).

Now that's just down right white of her, "mighty white" as one might say. Personally I wouldn't be friends with one so weak, of course the spring is going to be huge. How could she turn her back on an extra 100K of house winnings? What a quitter.

It comes as no surprise that the family is buying for the school district.

Could you find out the following?
1) Where does the buyer husband and wife work?

2) Are they hiring?

X - Yes she is a total quitter. I would have held out for at least $1 million, I mean it IS Cupertino.

eburbed - I do not know anything about the buyers except that they are Asian. And also that they didn't like the way the children in the San Jose schools looked, whatever that means.

if you aren’t aware of the numerous parallels between the constitutional aims of your founding fathers and the principles they drew from the Roman Republic, I suggest you google those phrases - Rome, founding fathers, republic.

Yes I get that. I did quite well on the European History AP exam. However, to look at the way Rome fell - and say that the USA is on the same trajectory is ridiculous. The usual suspects are high immigration, enormous welfare rolls, etc. I don't think the illegal immigration problem can be compared to the Goths, nor would I agree that our Congress has become a rubber stamp to the emperor/presidency. Especially with our new Congress.

eburbed - I do not know anything about the buyers except that they are Asian. And also that they didn’t like the way the children in the San Jose schools looked, whatever that means.

Doh.

I'd love to learn more about their finances. Are they doing 100% IO? Or are they Google employees?

eburbed - She told me that they are pre-approved, but nothing about the loan. I think she just got the offer so I don't think she knows much. I will find out everything though, she likes to talk :)

The lady across the hall from me sold her condo for $30k under asking. Maybe there is weakness in the condo market in Cupertino? I do not know. Nor do I care, unless my rent goes up (a lot).

The usual suspects are high immigration, enormous welfare rolls, etc. ...nor would I agree that our Congress has become a rubber stamp to the emperor/presidency.

Ummm... I know that history never exactly repeats itself (though it often "rhymes"). But given your above list, you don't see any parallels to today?

“Frisco values”

I don't think I like your tone Sir. What? Certainly you aren't suggesting there is something wrong with having an albino transvestite suck you off on a muni bus being careful not to spooge on your bag of medicinal reefer tucked in your prada back pack as you go home to your toney loft condo to snort coke off of a teenage prostitute you bought off of craigslist now are you?

OK, I'll bite, just to put this thing away, probably violating the tenet that you should "never argue with an idiot -- they will only drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."

Punchbowl Says:
DS, don’t be silly about claiming Trotsky as inspiration. Some of my best friends are Trotskyites.

That's pretty unlikely.

I just think that HARM is wrong about more regulation being needed. Fraud is already a criminal offense. If fraud has been done, then let the perpetrators be punished, criminally and civilly. People who have made misrepresentations that resulted in losses to others deserve to be behind bars or have their assets confiscated.

Yes, I could see why disagreeing with HARM means you call another poster a Stalinist.

That makes me a libertarian, not a specuvestor. Meanwhile, you’re still a Stalinist.

I have certainly posted some thoughtful critiques of so-called 'libertarianism' in the past and in this thread in fact, based on actually looking at this stuff in sociology and social policy classes. Being an almost uniquely American phenomenon, it doesn't really concern me directly to study it in great detail, though.

I'm not a Stalinist, nor a Trotskyist, nor a Leninist, etc etc. I may be a small-m marxist of sorts. I suppose I am really a Fabian Socia1ist with postmodernist realisations, and with concomitant regard for ethics and human rights -- that's the whole point of Fabianism. While Stalin took Russia from being a peasant-based agrarian society into industrialisation, he did it often at the expense of human rights, as even Russian govts have admitted now. Stalinism continued to flavour the style of Russian Communism up until the collapse of the Soviet Union. I would never support the violation of human rights and rights to safety and security of person that took place under Stalin's regime. For example, 'liquidating the kulaks' as you have put forward. (Note that Lenin signed off on orders to hang and persecute these people.) Further, as a Fabian Socia1ist, I don't even agree with the fundamental of Marxist theory that a better society can only be achieved through a process of revolution, which disqualifies me straight away from being stalinist, leninist, trotskyist or even communist. I believe there is too much upheaval and too many violations of ethics to justify a revolution except under the most extreme circumstances. And if a revolution should ever occur, due to extreme corruption, inequality or failure to recognise rights in a society, it is essential to conduct it in a way that demonstrates fundamental ethics.

And as many contemporary critics of Marx pointed out, his formulation of communism would likely lead to repressive totalitarian states.

What we have seen in the evolution of the 20th century welfare state is fabian socia1ism at work -- old age pensions, unemployment benefits, a progressive income tax, access to free or low cost healthcare, education and housing, where these things are not reliably being provided by the market to guarantee the welfare of all citizens. I could obviously write whole books about this change, I'll restrict it to one paragraph here.

Further, you will see that many of my proposals are already being enacted even in Anglo-based welfare states, traditionally at the bottom of the heap of welfare states in taxonomies. So it is not even extreme in the worst welfare states.

I can see, however, that getting caught up into the whole libertarian mindset and complex of ideas would sensitise you into seeing implications in remarks that aren't there, or to be tempted to engage in 'splitting' or swinging to black and white extremes in interpretations of everything. I believe that these libertarian assertions can be very easily critiqued, as per the Anna Yeatman quote I inserted earlier. Libertarianism seems to be a strange development of Scots and Irish refugees from English rule and dispossession from lands expanding into some very generous New World territory and coming up with a bunch of ideas to justify it. However, it flies in the face of reality and entrenched systems of government, the idea of the polity and recognition of citizen's rights and the very concept of citizenship. Plenty of other posters here have also critiqued so-called libertarianism, perhaps you should go after them with extreme, unjustified name-calling as well... they will probably put up less of a fight for a start, and they won't have a social sciences degree and training to start really picking it to pieces if provoked...

Hmmm, here is history exactly repeating itself (I came across this last week.)
http://net.lib.byu.edu/~rdh7/wwi/1918p/mesopo.html