Here is your open thread for Monday March 15th, 2010. You may post random links and off-topic discussions here. Also, if you have an idea or a topic you’d like to see covered in an article, please make it known.
Be sure to also check out the forums, and get your word in the user-driven discussions there!
Here’s a Monday bonus for you. It’s a recording I made last night behind my house in Kenmore.
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
It’s crunchtime for Northwest credit unions
[Changed to a link and excerpt by The Tim. Please do not post entire articles in the comments.]
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: The_Dude_Abides @ 1 – How about just a link in the future? As to the article, that was almost as poorly written as something Joel Connelly would write over at the P-I. It’s amazing that some of these people actually make a living writing things.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
While I work on today’s post, enjoy this: http://seattlebubble.com/blog/2010/03/15/monday-open-thread-2010-03-15/#frogs
It’s a chorus of hundreds of these guys:
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I had a horrible incident growing up with a frog and my dads Lawnmower. I remember crying after the incident with a rather large bull frog.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Are the 70s going to repeat themselves (at least in terms of inflation)?
Yesterday I had a discussion with pfft about this. He claims yes. I brought up the example that in the 70s 1 USD = 4 SFr and today 1 USD = 1 SFr. So, at least something must be different. Bernanke also doubts that the 70s will repeat according to this article from 2008:
http://www.zimbio.com/Ben+Bernanke/articles/214/Bernanke+sees+no+repeat+70s+style+inflation
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Cue the crickets! Haha. Here is what I hear behind my residence at night: http://soundbible.com/1266-City-Ambiance.html
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: The Tim @ 3 –
Yes Tim The Frogs are Croaking, in More Ways than One
Article in part:
“…The current rate of frog extinctions is thus 3,000 times faster than than it should be, and we stand to lose at least one-third of the world’s 6,485 amphibian species in our lifetime if we don’t work swiftly to stop the extinctions….”
http://www.savethefrogs.com/frogblog/frog-news/the-top-ten-ways-to-stop-frogs-from-going-extinct/
I hear the bees are disappearing too. Kiss flowers and fruit good-bye?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
why has the dollar not collapsed and interest rates not skyrocketed during our deficit binge? the collapse in private sector borrowing has swamped any government borrowing.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/15/chinas-water-pistol/
“The US private sector has gone from being a huge net borrower to being a net lender; meanwhile, government borrowing has surged, but not enough to offset the private plunge. As a nation, our dependence on foreign loans is way down; the surging deficit is, in effect, being domestically financed.”
Rate this comment:
0 
0
If one ever needed a clue that all is not as it seems in the economy, especially the financial sector, here you go. Banks are terrified to proceed on foreclosures and have to take the subsequent hit to their books. So the backlog just keeps getting bigger, and bigger, and bigger! Eventually this shadow supply will hit the market driving home prices lower.
.” . . for all loans more than 90 days in arrears, the average days delinquent is now at 272 days—up from 204 days in early 2008. For loans in foreclosure, the aging numbers are even more staggering: loans in this bucket average 410 days delinquent, up from 260 days delinquent in early 2008.
Ponder those numbers for just a second. On average, severely delinquent borrowers have gone more than 9 months without making a mortgage payment—and yet foreclosure has not yet started for them. For those borrowers who are in the foreclosure process, it’s been an average of 13.6 months—more than one full year—since they last made any payment on their mortgage.
Ahhh … the “Squatter Stimulus Plan” – live mortgage free”
http://www.housingwire.com/2010/03/15/housing-recovery-is-spelled-r-e-o/
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: pfft @ 8 –
Again, Krugman is either an idiot, a hard-core partisan tool, or evil. Is he purposefully distorting the known data, or has his drinking caused his mind to fail?
The chart on which his argument relies shows “net borrowing.” He then makes the jump to presume or claim that negative changes in net borrowing (reductions in debt) equate to real savings when it is not. The chart goes negative only because private or consumer debt is being paid down, not because real cash savings (which he then assumes could be “invested” in public debt) is suddenly being accumulated. Remember, folks- in government speak a reduction in debt is seen and reported the same as an increase in savings. It’s as though somehow paying off a Mastercard magically translates to an equal and immediate increase in your savings account. What crap.
There are problems with the rest of his assumptions too, but this alone is enough to invalidate the entire argument. I hope this guy loses everything in the coming collapse he is willfully enabling.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I read Krugman pretty regularly and don’t always agree with him. He has done his share of criticizing Obama and the folks he surrounds himself with, maybe not to the same extent as he did Bush, but still…
So I’d rule out him being a partisan tool. And he did win a Nobel prize, which is generally not given to idiots. And nah, he’s not evil. Wrong? Maybe.
I’m guessing that in reality, Scotsman has more disagreement with Pffft than he does with Krugman.
By Scotsman @ 10:
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 11 –
Four quick points, Ira:
Krugman’s column is titled “The Conscience of a Liberal”
I love Phfft
Krugman won his Noble for stating the obvious re: trade patterns
Krugman eats at Claim Jumper when in town.
Given the above, I’m going with a new choice- “partisan idiot.”
I’ve always felt economists should be more like scientists and less like global warming supporters or deniers. But Krugman seems to have decided right up front that he’ll never meet a democrat or deficit he doesn’t like, and he’ll worry about justifying the consequences later. Despite his NYT columns, there are few real economists who see him as a serious academic. He’s the Paris Hilton of economists in my opinion.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Scotsman @ 12 –
No way Krugman eats at Claim Jumper. He’d be much more likely to be found at some trendy Seattle place that serves sustainably harvested free range marinated pigeon entrails in a beurre blanc reduction, a two ounce portion for forty dollars.
And unlike Paris Hilton, I don’t think Krugman walks around with a little dog in his purse.
Also: who calls themselves liberals? Obama doesn’t. Bill Clinton never did. Disagree with Krugman, sure. But he’s not pretending to be something he’ s not.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Ira Sacharoff @ 13:
If I had photoshop skills you would be proven so wrong…. ;-)
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Ira Sacharoff @ 13:
Maybe just something to think about: What is regarded as “liberal” means something very different in the US, compared to most other countries. Words are something marvelous though: Almost everyone likes other people to be social but few like them to be socialists.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Daniel @ 15 –
You Got It Daniel
The old fashion progressives would turn in their graves seeing today’s so-called “liberal” pandering to the elites, banks and Wall Street.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Scotsman @ 14:
Looks like he’s a cat man…
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Scotsman @ 14:
But hey, just for you…
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: The Tim @ 18 –
Wow- it’s true- people do start to look like their pets…
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Ira Sacharoff @ 11 –
Ira wrote: “He has done his share of criticizing Obama and the folks he surrounds himself with, maybe not to the same extent as he did Bush, but still…, ”
That’s an unfair comparison when you talk about the economy considering that Bush’s own Treasure Secretary Paul O’Neill described Bush’s behavior in cabinet meetings as “a blind man in a roomful of deaf people. …”). Paul O’Neill telling him the second round of tax postponements was a bad idea, and Rove leaning on Bush, whispering “stay the course”. And this was long before the crisis. Ira, anyone that did not let Fox News do the thinking for them, criticized the moron.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Cheap South @ 20 –
I don’t think we’re disagreeing here. I was pointing out that I don’t consider Paul Krugman to be a partisan tool because I’ve read his criticisms of Timothy Geithner and Obama’s catering to the large banking/brokerage interests.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Scotsman @ 12 Despite his NYT columns, there are few real economists who see him as a serious academic. He’s the Paris Hilton of economists in my opinion.
Hmmmm. He’s a Nobel Laureate. Usually considered to be a pretty elite honor amongst economists.
Perhaps the NYT articles have led you to confuse him with Ben Stein?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: deejayoh @ 22 –
“Hmmmm. He’s a Nobel Laureate. Usually considered to be a pretty elite honor amongst economists.”
He won his Noble for stating the obvious- that’s it’s more efficient to produce on a large scale (economies of scale) even when diversity in the end products is desired, and let the globalization of the economy supply the needed diversity. In other words, it’s better for GM to build trucks in the U.S. and Porsche to build 911s in Germany, and then ship them to customers all over the world than it is to dismiss globalization and have GM and Porsche build small plants in every country that uses the end product. He identified a trend that was already in place and wrote about it. A decent grad student could have done the same.
The Noble just doesn’t seem to be what it once was. Remember, Al Gore has a Noble for what is now heavily discredited science, and Obama has one for being black and getting elected president, or something. Sorry, I’m not impressed, especially given the level of Krugman’s recent “work.”
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Scotsman @ 23 –
While the Nobel truly is an honor, there’s no question that politics plays a huge part in who receives it.
Henry ***ing Kissinger got one, fer gawdsakes.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Scotsman @ 23:
See, even when someone is “stating the obvious” there is still plenty of room to not understand them and misrepresent it like above.
As far as Nobel prices go:
1) The “Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences” is not technical a Nobel prize.
2) The peace prize is different and bad choices seem a lot more prevalent. Notice that it is granted not by the Swedish academy of Sciences but by the Norwegian Nobel Commitee, whose members are appointed by the Norwegian parliament. This is hardly an unbiased committee.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Just a reminder that the Optimistic Bear internet radio show will be airing live tonight (Tuesday the 16th) at 9:00pm Pacific Time. We will be discussing the past week in economics and finance. Feel free to call in and share your thoughts.
http://surkanstance.blogspot.com/2009/11/introducing-optimistic-bear-weekly.html
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Scotsman @ 23:
Hmm. Who sounds partisan now?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Scotsman,
I would have been disappointed had you not come back with Al Gore and Obama.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
“Pffft” . . . as they say.
I love how you guys refute the substance of the argument. Repeat after me: “what?”
Al Gore- the gift that just keeps on giving. Soon to be followed by Obama and that hopey-changey thing.
;-)
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Scotsman @ 29 – The substance of your argument seems to be an ad hominem attack on Krugman. You know who else used ad hominem attacks? Hitler.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I saw this interesting graph: http://img121.imageshack.us/img121/8261/sauploadcaseshillerchar.png
on the Bogleheads Forum: http://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=51960&mrr=1268797657
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: corncob @ 30 –
So you get to “jump the shark” and imply that I’m Hitler (probably along with anybody else who’s slightly to the right of say, Hugo Chavez). . . but I’m the one engaged in ad hominem attacks? I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.
Look, if you think Krugman is the greatest thing to come around since butter in a squeeze bottle, buy a poster of him and put it in your bedroom. As Paris would say- “that’s hot!”
Whatever.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By scotsman @ 9:
banks probably just have too many foreclosures to get through. they are probably just swamped. it’s their loans, if they want to keep the homeowner in the home until the housing market is better they can.
we here a ton about this shadow inventory. the trouble is we never hear if there is more or less than during all the past real estate cycles…
banks don’t have dump houses.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Scotsman @ 10:
I asked last time you made those claims for a source and I never got one. can I have one?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Scotsman @ 12:
you’re so wrong it’s not even funny. first of all, he’s said the time to run a budget deficit is now in a crisis, not like bush who had trillions during relatively good times on takes breaks for the rich that were “unfunded liabilities” and a war not paid for. you can see the meanness that is the republican party. trillions added to the deficit for tax cuts for the rich but no money to help 30,000,000 million americans get to the doctor. think of all the people who will survive cancer. think of all the people who will not lose toes or a leg to diabetes. think of all the people who won’t lose a daughter, a brother, a son, a sister, a mother, a father or a friend. that should show you where the priorities of the republican party are.
back on topic:
He Wasn’t The One We’ve Been Waiting For
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/20/he-wasnt-the-one-weve-been-waiting-for/
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Scotsman @ 23:
too funny. out of this world funny.
hottest decade on record!
krugman warned about a housing bubble in 2005.
EDIT:
sorry to dash your hopes and dreams.
AP IMPACT: Science Not Faked, but Not Pretty
AP IMPACT: Climate scientist e-mails show effort to not share data, pettiness, but no fakery
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=9319400
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: pfft @ 33 –
You have made really good points that have altered the way I look at the economy. In a very positive way the same as sniglet has had me thinking in new directions.
I can assure you that banks never thought they would have the amounts of inventory they are about to be holding. It’s like nothing I have ever seen.
There have been times when there were large back logs of foreclosed properties.
I’m just going to make the statement that there have been times in history where the foreclosed inventory could be cleared within a 7 year cycle.
If you pick 2007 as the start of the collapse of the housing market then we have three years of creating a back log in foreclosed properties. After this selling season we will have another group of disappointed sellers, and I would expect next year to be the same.
The biggest difference this time is the sheer volume of new construction, the over building, the relaxation of land use policy, and cheapening of international building codes. Even if we absorbed all of the new construction inventory the Master Builders Association has enough members to build us up a few million more housing units in a couple of months.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: pfft @ 36 –
Your skills as a researcher need polishing. The ABC news link you provided refers to an article published on Dec. 12, 2009. To say that a lot has transpired since then is an understatement.
Was the data faked? Not in the strictest sense, but it was heavily manipulated and only selective bits were used. Unfortunately, we can’t say for sure how badly it was abused because,mysteriously enough, it has now been “lost” so we will never have a peer review.
There are really only 4 data sets of record for global temperatures since 1900. They are the CRU set (now lost), the NASA set (now discredited due to environmental contamination and matching against the CRU set), a third set judged incomplete and a set controlled by the Japanese. Only the CRU and NASA sets were judged comprehensive enough and in support of the claim of AGW. Now they are gone.
Here’s the current situation, all the fluff and noise aside. No one can currently point to an accepted data set that actually supports the claim of global warming, let alone AGW. But the old claims and news keep getting recycled- as in your post- to suggest that all the data still exists, and is valid. Even the head of NASA has come out and said they made mistakes, their data wasn’t very good, and they can’t support the old claims.
Maybe AGW is real, maybe it isn’t- but there isn’t a good enough data set available at this time to honestly answer the question. There is a boatload of historical data going back millions of years to suggest this is just part of a normal climate cycle and that atmospheric CO2 lags, not causes, increases in global temps. Hence, my money is on no AGW. But you may want to “invest” differently.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Scotsman @ 38:
give me real sources on your NASA data. show me a mainstream link that supports your claims. all your claims and opinions, no matter if it’s economics or climate science, rest on your opinion being right and the data that doesn’t support you is faked, rigged, a ponzi scheme and etc. that you totally discredit. you should think about that.
the hockey stick graph that you claim has been totally debunked has not been. the researchers left out tree ring data because it doesn’t correlate to temperature data since the 60s. that is the whole controversy. it’s a manufactured controversy that people who aren’t scientists and don’t want to be have hyped. noticed the hype has all gone away?
” Even the head of NASA has come out and said they made mistakes, their data wasn’t very good, and they can’t support the old claims.”
source please.
“There is a boatload of historical data going back millions of years to suggest this is just part of a normal climate cycle and that atmospheric CO2 lags, not causes, increases in global temps.”
over twenty years of IPCC reports have proved otherwise. do you think they haven’t studied the points you’ve brought up?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Here you go:
http://briefingroom.typepad.com/the_briefing_room/2010/03/bombshell-nasa-admits-their-world-climate-data-not-reliable.html
” Now that alibi has come crashing down as newly released emails show NASA regarded its own GISS data as inferior to the now discredited CRU set.”
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/climategate-stunner-nasa-heads-knew-nasa-data-was-poor-then-used-data-from-cru/?singlepage=true
“the emails reveal that at least three of the four datasets were not independent, that NASA GISS was not considered to be accurate, and that these quality issues were known to both top climate scientists and to the mainstream press.”
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=61b0590f-c5e6-4772-8cd1-2fefe0905363
“The hottest year since 1880 becomes 1934 instead of 1998, which is now just second; 1921 is third.
Four of the 10 hottest years were in the 1930s, only three in the past decade. Claiming that man-made carbon dioxide has caused the natural disasters of recent years makes as much sense as claiming fossil-fuel burning caused the Great Depression.
The 15 hottest years since 1880 are spread over seven decades. Eight occurred before atmospheric carbon dioxide began its recent rise; seven occurred afterwards.
In other words, there is no discernible trend, no obvious warming of late.”
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/12/03/is-nasa-hiding-its-climate-data-too/
“The University of East Anglia’s CRU had to admit this week to destroying the underlying raw data for its anthropogenic global-warming theories, rendering their conclusions untestable ”
http://www.lesjones.com/2010/03/04/nasagiss-has-been-adjusting-temperatures-since-2000/
“Thanks to emails revealed via FOIA requests, we now know that NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies has been adjusting satellite temperature data since 2000.
But adjusting temperatures which way? Down? Sideways? In three-dimensional space?
I’m kidding. Of course they adjusted them up.”
http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles%202004/Winter2003-4/global_warming.pdf
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Scotsman @ 38 –
The myth of global warming is the thing a Rush Limbaugh is made of.
Of course there is global warming the same as there is acid rain.
You can discuss the data into the ground, but we need to broaden our sources of energy.
Let oil go. Global warming, or not, let’s get past the oil monopolies.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By pfft @ 33:
Actually, the banks can’t. It’s accounting fraud. We’ll hear much more about it when things ease up, but for now, nobody is going to prosecute while we hang in the balance.
You make a very good point though regarding a likely bottleneck in the process. The institutional infrastructure is not sufficient for the volumes we are experiencing. There is little incentive to add that infrastructure. It amounts to paying extra to march more quickly down the path towards FDIC receivership.
Rate this comment:
0 
0