Mid-Week Open Thread (2012-03-28)

NOTE: If you are subscribed to Seattle Bubble’s RSS feed and are seeing these open threads in the feed, please switch to our official feed at http://feeds.feedburner.com/SeattleBubble Thanks!

Here is your open thread for the mid-week on March 28th, 2012. 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!

0.00 avg. rating (0% score) - 0 votes

About The Tim

Tim Ellis is the founder of Seattle Bubble. His background in engineering and computer / internet technology, a fondness of data-based analysis of problems, and an addiction to spreadsheets all influence his perspective on the Seattle-area real estate market. Tim also hosts the weekly improv comedy sci-fi podcast Dispatches from the Multiverse.

62 comments:

  1. 1
    Tatiana Kalashnikov says:

    Shiller says the shift toward renting and city living could mean “that we will never in our lifetime see a rebound in these prices in the suburbs.”

    http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-03-27/markets/31243519_1_housing-slump-housing-market-robert-shiller

    This comment by Robert Schiller caught my I and I think he is on to something. He says that there are basically two markets – the cities and the suburbs. And the suburbs are in for a long, long slide.

  2. 2

    RE: Tatiana Kalashnikov @ 1

    And the Suburbs Real Estate Mess Drag Down the City Too, Whether The City Admits it or Not

    In the Bubble blogs we mostly look to the economy to possibly help real estate, but that’s backward thinking, real estate drags down the economy per this recent Seattle Times article, which I agree with in that regard, with one horrifying caveat: why are they using old 2010 anomalous 1st quarter employment growth for 2012 [its meaningless]? And more importantly, why aren’t they looking at the last 3 years under Obama from 2009-2012 employment trending from the BLS data base, rather than cherry picking upward quarter trends and ignoring the overall downward trend [at best flat] in Seattle/Bellevue/Everett total labor force….wishful unscientific thinking?

    http://mobile.seattletimes.com/story/today/2017851794/track-.-.-./

  3. 3
    David Losh says:

    RE: Tatiana Kalashnikov @ 1

    He is exactly right that more people will head into the cities, globally. We have a finance economy, rather than agricultural, or manufacturing. People will go where the money is.

  4. 4
    Haybaler says:

    RE: Tatiana Kalashnikov @ 1

    I’ve been particularly interested in this phenomenon, urban vs suburban vs agri locations as it is of personal interest to my activities. Ag land is shooting to the moon. Good read.

    PS, “I” = “eye” sometimes, not to be critical, just helpful…

  5. 5
    ChrisM says:

    Bidding wars in Renton:

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-27/bidding-wars-erupt-as-u-s-supply-of-homes-for-sale-falls.html

    “Matthew and Carina Hensley offered $10,000 more than the asking price for a three-bedroom house in suburban Seattle, then lost out to one of seven other bidders.

    Their $270,000 proposal last month came with a family portrait and a letter introducing the couple, their eight-month- old daughter, Harper, and their desire to build a family in the Renton, Washington, house with a yard backing onto a woody hillside.”

  6. 6
    wreckingbull says:

    RE: David Losh @ 3 – All the better for those of us that know a dirty little secret. You can be part of the modern economy while living in a rural area. People flocking to cities is old news and the established trend.

    The real news will be the revitalization of rural America and small towns through technology and the desire of people wanting to escape a declining standard of living.

  7. 7

    By wreckingbull @ 6:

    The real news will be the revitalization of rural America and small towns through technology and the desire of people wanting to escape a declining standard of living.

    Good point. People often point to the price of gas as being a negative for rural areas, but broadband access could help people move to those areas who would not consider it before.

    BTW, by coincidence I had just deleted an email about this item right before writing this post.

    http://www.commerce.wa.gov/DesktopModules/CTEDNews/CTEDNewsView.aspx?tabID=0&ItemID=342&mid=840

  8. 8
    Scotsman says:

    RE: Tatiana Kalashnikov @ 1

    I think he’s wrong on this. The market and tech changes will tend to balance out what we might expect. There are a lot of disadvantages to inner city living when public services (police?) get cut to balance budgets, etc.

    As for pricing, I think we will see nominal prices that match the peak within a decade. Adjusted for inflation, we may not see peak prices again for a generation or more.

  9. 9
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Scotsman @ 8 – Things will re-adjust after the first Sino-American war. After LA is vaporized and the rejoicing ends, Seattle RE will heat up.

  10. 10
    whatsmyname says:

    By Scotsman @ 8:

    RE: Tatiana Kalashnikov @ 1

    As for pricing, I think we will see nominal prices that match the peak within a decade. Adjusted for inflation, we may not see peak prices again for a generation or more.

    I kind of agree, but think this illustrates your often cautionary posts about future unknowns. Your “within a decade” sounds pretty reasonable based on a Obama/GOP Congress or a Romney/DEM Congress. I think you could change it to “within 5 years” under an Obama/Dem Congress. My friend tells me there are a number of scenarios that just don’t relate to CS methodology.

    Supposedly, a Romney/GOP Congress combo would indicate Seattle house prices at $14MM. However, this is because it costs a lot to buy and demolish 80 apartment units while building your in-city estate – so not really CS comparable.

    A Ron Paul presidency would indicate median Seattle house prices at 1200 to 1700 “new gold dollars” plus a box of bullets – very hard to convert to CS.

    With a Santorum/Gingrich superticket, he thinks a Seattle house could be had for as little as two women plus one manacled urban worker (whatever that is). However, he says they must all be healthy and of prime breeding age and inclination.

  11. 11
    pfft says:

    By Tatiana Kalashnikov @ 1:

    Shiller says the shift toward renting and city living could mean “that we will never in our lifetime see a rebound in these prices in the suburbs.”

    http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-03-27/markets/31243519_1_housing-slump-housing-market-robert-shiller

    This comment by Robert Schiller caught my I and I think he is on to something. He says that there are basically two markets – the cities and the suburbs. And the suburbs are in for a long, long slide.

    there is one problem with that. commuting costs aren’t THAT much to justify “this time it’s different” for suburban housing. Certainly not enough to bring a large gap between urban housing and suburban housing. eventually prices will adjust. you can’t have one price or the other getting too far away or you will have an arbitrage.

  12. 12
    pfft says:

    By wreckingbull @ 6:

    RE: David Losh @ 3
    The real news will be the revitalization of rural America and small towns through technology and the desire of people wanting to escape a declining standard of living.

    the reason rural america is doing so good is not from some declining standards of livings it’s because of the commodity boom. farm income is at records. just the reverse of when commodity markets were falling.

  13. 13
    pfft says:

    a commute to the suburbs depending on what type of car you drive could cost you between $500 and $1,000 a year. that’s not all that much. buying a new car with better mileage or carpooling could be an option. even if gas prices got high a van or even bus could be available. my cousin used to take the bus an hour into NYC. sometimes his commute was shorter than those who lived in NYC.

  14. 14
    David Losh says:

    RE: wreckingbull @ 6

    I thought so too, but it never happened. Technology likes to be in areas of other technology. To build a rural complex sounds inviting, but then you are competing with other tech facilities that offer more diversion.

    A manufacturing plant can be anywhere, and direct ship. That is what Boeing is banking on today. It might work, but it’s a risk.

    Haybaler also makes a great point that agricultural land is a hot commodity for speculation. That will never be a driving force for residential housing. Farm labor is transient.

    All in all, urban housing is a global trend.

  15. 15
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 56:

    RE: pfft @ 51 – We really need to get past the Bush tax cuts as an issue and come up with tax increases which make sense. That means tax increases which don’t have a significant adverse impact on GDP. That would include tax increases on the middle class, and would be very politically unpopular.

    do you know the history of the bush tax cuts?

    1. they heavily favored the rich

    2. they were because we were projected to have surpluses. we don’t have those surpluses now so they should expire.

    3. taxes on the rich have much less of an impact on the economy than do those on the middle class. middle class income is much more sensitive to taxes than the income of the richest among us.

    higher taxes on the rich will have little impact on the economy. the rates will just go back to the clinton era. the clinton era had a tax increase and the economy boomed anyway. I remember Republicans saying we’d lose 10 million jobs. we didn’t.

  16. 16
    wreckingbull says:

    RE: pfft @ 12 – No. Slow down. Read the post again. It had nothing to do with commodity prices, nor did it have anything to do with rural America doing ‘good’ today.

    It has everything to do with the notion that eventually (read: not entirely today) people will realize that technology enables flexibility in our working arrangements. Lower cost employees for corporations, and happier employees are two obvious benefits.

  17. 17
    wreckingbull says:

    RE: David Losh @ 14 – Never happened? Read Kary’s link. Rural America is just now getting broadband so it never had a chance to happen. My point is what is going to happen. My post was a response to a prediction.

    Also, you completely miss the point when you say “Technology likes to be in areas of other technology”. The whole point of a high-tech, rural workforce is that technology removes this need. I work with people all over the globe on a daily basis. When the day is done, I fire up the Deere and get some quality seat time. Most of them think I am in some stuffy office, staring out a smoked glass window at the cars on the cloverleaf. It makes no difference to them.

    By the way, you might want to check out this video. It completely debunks your assertions.

    http://www.ruralsourcing.com/RSIonTV/

  18. 18
    David Losh says:

    Not every person working in technology wants to live in the country. Many want to be in city, with in city diversions. They also want to associate, especially the sales force, with other industries that compliment their own.

    You can say it can all be done on line, but that isn’t realistic. Other countries are competing with us by how vibrant the culture is.

    Honestly I looked at rural communities for a long time. For awhile I thought that manufacturing would want to be in rural areas, but I was wrong. You can build plants for local labor sources, but it is hard to attract more labor as you grow. We are a mobile country, and people are moving into cities. It’s also a global phenomenon.

  19. 19

    By pfft @ 15:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 56:

    RE: pfft @ 51 – We really need to get past the Bush tax cuts as an issue and come up with tax increases which make sense. That means tax increases which don’t have a significant adverse impact on GDP. That would include tax increases on the middle class, and would be very politically unpopular.

    do you know the history of the bush tax cuts?

    1. they heavily favored the rich

    2. they were because we were projected to have surpluses. we don’t have those surpluses now so they should expire.

    3. taxes on the rich have much less of an impact on the economy than do those on the middle class. middle class income is much more sensitive to taxes than the income of the richest among us.

    higher taxes on the rich will have little impact on the economy. the rates will just go back to the clinton era. the clinton era had a tax increase and the economy boomed anyway. I remember Republicans saying we’d lose 10 million jobs. we didn’t.

    That may be all well and good, but rather than just undoing what was done in the past, I’m proposing tax increases specifically designed to not interfere with GDP. I’ve mentioned this in the past. Taxing W-2 income higher than 1099 income. Giving tax breaks to businesses that employ people. Taking away the tax deduction for foreign corporate income taxes paid, except to the extent that the income was derived from wholesale, retail and/or services in a foreign country.

    I agree not all tax increases hurt the economy, but some do.

  20. 20

    By wreckingbull @ 17:

    I work with people all over the globe on a daily basis. When the day is done, I fire up the Deere and get some quality seat time. Most of them think I am in some stuffy office, staring out a smoked glass window at the cars on the cloverleaf. It makes no difference to them.

    When I was still practicing law the bankruptcy court moved to an electronic case filing system (ECF). It was no longer really that convenient to have an office right across the street from the courthouse. If I wanted to file a document, I did it from my desk. If I wanted to see something in a court file, I did it from my desk.

    For a time I was trying to figure out how to do that all from Mexico or Tahiti! I could have been anywhere in the world, but I was right across the street in downtown Seattle.

  21. 21
    Scotsman says:

    You can’t make this stuff up. It’s like a really bad movie- on another planet:

    “Federal Prosecution Of Financial Fraud Falls To 20-Year Low, New Report Shows”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/15/financial-fraud-prosecution_n_1095933.html

  22. 22
    wreckingbull says:

    RE: David Losh @ 18 – Yes not every employee wants to live in the country or even a small town. I can’t seem to find where I wrote or implied that.

    Talk to some of the Facebook employees who live in Prineville, OR and I’ll bet you will find some happy people. What a bay area employee pays to rent a converted garage in Sunnyvale would buy 40 acres with a front porch in Central Oregon. I know which one I would pick.

  23. 23

    By wreckingbull @ 22:

    RE: David Losh @ 18 – Yes not every employee wants to live in the country or even a small town. I can’t seem to find where I wrote or implied that.

    I don’t think you did. And I don’t think Losh’s argument that it can’t all be done on line was very convincing.

    Proximity to what you need to do is important, but sometimes that proximity pertains mainly to personal things, not work.

  24. 24
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Scotsman @ 21 – Increasing levels of financial fraud are necessary to grow GDP and keep people employed.

  25. 25
    David Losh says:

    RE: wreckingbull @ 22

    The data center in Prineville is just, a data center. After that you would have the realities of living in Prineville Oregon. It’s conflicting cultures.

    One day the main manufacturing economy is wood working, and then it will be a technology center? The place has one Starbucks, and then it will have two. The local population will rebel. Look at the price of housing that is now $200K. No one is going to stand for that, not even the new tech industry.

    Very few people want to live on forty acres with a mule.

  26. 26

    By David Losh @ 25:

    Very few people want to live on forty acres with a mule.

    That’s what makes the land less expensive. But as more people have the opportunity to make that choice due to technology, the land will become more expensive.

  27. 27
    wreckingbull says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 23 – I typically don’t engage him like this, as I find intelligent conversations with him quite difficult. In this case, I felt I had to since he clearly has very ignorant and dated views on the subject matter. The mule comment is a perfect example. The whole movement also includes small towns with 15K to 30K populations. These towns often have interesting, recovering downtowns and affordable, leafy neighborhoods.

  28. 28

    RE: wreckingbull @ 27 -I’m flexible in that I could live downtown, in the suburbs or in very rural areas, but I can also understand why some people would want to live in only one of those types of places.

  29. 29
    wreckingbull says:

    I have worked with people that maintained studio condos/apartments downtown and made their real home a few hours outside of the urban core. They claimed a better quality of life with cheaper cost of living than buying a home in the urban core. This probably only works if you can get your employer to allow at least 2 days a week to work at home. Employers are coming around.

  30. 30

    RE: wreckingbull @ 29 – Part of this can be age related. Living downtown can be nicer when you’re in your 20s and 30s and then again when you’re 70+.

  31. 31

    From a CNN article:

    “With record profits and rising production, I’m not worried about the big oil companies,” Obama said in the White House Rose Garden. “… I think it’s time they got by without more help from taxpayers, who are having a tough enough time paying their bills and filling up their tanks.”

    Apparently President Obama thinks the American people are stupid, and don’t realize that incentives to produce more oil will produce more oil and lead to lower prices. Or he thinks we have enough oil, and is happy with the price of oil.

  32. 32
    Blurtman says:

    Michael Hudson on the Federal Reserve System

    “But after the severe 1907 financial crisis, a National Monetary Commission was reformed. Under the then-Republican administration, it recognized a need for more active government intervention to prevent future financial crises. It also recognized the desirability of moving away from the Anglo-Dutch-American system of “merchant banking” based on short-term lending against collateral in place, or for shipping of goods already produced. The National Monetary Commission’s longest volumes were on the great German industrial banks, and Republican policy aimed at bringing banking into the industrial era, to provide long-term funding after the model of German and other Central European banks.

    However, the leading bankers sought to use the crisis as an opportunity to grab power for Wall Street, away from the Treasury. In this sense, the Fed was founded in large part to take monetary control away from Washington’s elected officials and appointees, and privatize the supply of money and credit.

    So its place in the U.S. financial and economic structure is to allocate credit, primarily to serve Wall Street financial interests. That explains the insistence on the financial class here and abroad in insisting on an “independent” central bank. It means that instead of serving the public interest, it serves the interests of the banking class. The hoped-for transformation of commercial banking into long-term industrial banking was not achieved.”

    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/03/michael-hudson-on-the-federal-reserve-system.html

  33. 33

    RE: Blurtman @ 32 – Do you really think that you’d want to leave monetary policy to politicians? One advantage of monetary policy over fiscal is speed, and you would lose a lot of that if you put it in charge of politicians.

    Sure Congress acted within days of 9/11 to protect insurance companies, but the Fed acted much faster (almost instantly) getting liquidity into the system.

  34. 34

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 31 – I just realized I neglected to link the article:

    http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/29/politics/oil-subsidies/index.html

    Note how far into it you have to go before there’s any discussion at all of the types of taxes being discussed.

  35. 35
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 33 – It is a tough choice, no doubt. On the one hand we have a consortium of banks looking out for their own self interests which has contributed to the current Depression, and on the other hand we would have politicians acting in their own self interests of getting re-elected, and getting a plum industry job after public service. Chocie A has already proven to be a disaster.

  36. 36
    Blurtman says:

    Terrorist agency demands money.

    “The Pentagon said on Thursday it would expect hundreds of thousands of layoffs across the defense industry if lawmakers did not take action to avert an additional $500 billion in defense budget cuts that could take effect in January 2013.

    Frank Kendall, the Defense Department’s acting undersecretary for acquisition, technology and logistics, said the cuts would force the Pentagon to break many hard-won contracts with industry, including a multibillion dollar deal with Boeing Co for development of a new refueling plane.

    The Navy’s contracts with Lockheed Martin Corp and Australia’s Austal Ltd for littoral combat ships would also be vulnerable if the mandatory cuts, known as sequestration, took effect as planned, Kendall told the Senate Armed Services Committee at a confirmation hearing to stay in the job.”

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/29/us-congress-pentagon-budget-idUSBRE82S13920120329

  37. 37

    Is it just me, or do the trees have a lot more moss on them this year? I was just driving by “The Great Northern” and it’s starting to look like a rain forest up there. Even down by Fall City it’s bad, but I’ve been noticing it to a lesser extent in Renton and Kent.

  38. 38
  39. 39
    David Losh says:

    RE: wreckingbull @ 27

    Ignorant? or dated?

    This same argument has been going on for decades. High speed internet connections aren’t going to change that. It’s a cultural issue, the same as using a work force in India, or South East Asia, Europe, or Argentina. Rural America has a very deeply entrenched culture.

    The internet has also made people want a movie theater. Have they reopened the movie theater in Prineville? It was closed for some time. People want to eat at restaurants, go to the theater, see a ballet, get drunk, and go bar hopping. The kids want to play video games, and shop at the mall.

    The internet opened up the world, but that view of the world is very urban.

  40. 40
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 32:

    Michael Hudson on the Federal Reserve System

    “But after the severe 1907 financial crisis, a National Monetary Commission was reformed. Under the then-Republican administration, it recognized a need for more active government intervention to prevent future financial crises. It also recognized the desirability of moving away from the Anglo-Dutch-American system of â��merchant bankingâ�� based on short-term lending against collateral in place, or for shipping of goods already produced. The National Monetary Commissionâ��s longest volumes were on the great German industrial banks, and Republican policy aimed at bringing banking into the industrial era, to provide long-term funding after the model of German and other Central European banks.

    However, the leading bankers sought to use the crisis as an opportunity to grab power for Wall Street, away from the Treasury. In this sense, the Fed was founded in large part to take monetary control away from Washington�s elected officials and appointees, and privatize the supply of money and credit.

    So its place in the U.S. financial and economic structure is to allocate credit, primarily to serve Wall Street financial interests. That explains the insistence on the financial class here and abroad in insisting on an â��independentâ�� central bank. It means that instead of serving the public interest, it serves the interests of the banking class. The hoped-for transformation of commercial banking into long-term industrial banking was not achieved.”

    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/03/michael-hudson-on-the-federal-reserve-system.html

    I get the paranoia over the Federal Reserve but if you read about any of the past banking panics you realize that even with it’s mistakes the Federal Reserve does more good than bad.

  41. 41
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 31:

    From a CNN article:

    “With record profits and rising production, I’m not worried about the big oil companies,” Obama said in the White House Rose Garden. “… I think it’s time they got by without more help from taxpayers, who are having a tough enough time paying their bills and filling up their tanks.”

    Apparently President Obama thinks the American people are stupid, and don’t realize that incentives to produce more oil will produce more oil and lead to lower prices. Or he thinks we have enough oil, and is happy with the price of oil.

    no, the cost of oil will be exactly the same except it will be shifted from the taxpayers to people that use oil. it’s kind of like saying a pollution(carbon) tax will increase prices. no, it will just shift the cost from the public to the users of carbon reflecting the true cost.

  42. 42
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 35:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 33 – It is a tough choice, no doubt. On the one hand we have a consortium of banks looking out for their own self interests which has contributed to the current Depression, and on the other hand we would have politicians acting in their own self interests of getting re-elected, and getting a plum industry job after public service. Chocie A has already proven to be a disaster.

    no, our recessions and financial system have been a lot more stable since the Federal Reserve realize how to do their job after the Great Depression.

  43. 43
    wreckingbull says:

    By David Losh @ 39:

    The internet has also made people want a movie theater.

    Once again, wrong. I am sensing a trend here. Movie attendance peaked in 2002 and continues to fall. It is now at a 16 year low.

  44. 44
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 40 – There were banking panics after the establishment of the Federal Reserve. Some doozies in 1930 and 1931, for example. The establishment of deposit insurance is credited with ending savings bank panics. There were runs on Lehman Brothers and Bear Sterans not all that long ago.

  45. 45
    pfft says:

    When FDR assumed the Presidency in March of 1933 most of the states already had closed their banks by the time he enacted a bank holiday. Recessions in the post-WWII era have been a lot milder.

  46. 46
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 44:

    RE: pfft @ 40 – There were banking panics after the establishment of the Federal Reserve. Some doozies in 1930 and 1931, for example. The establishment of deposit insurance is credited with ending savings bank panics. There were runs on Lehman Brothers and Bear Sterans not all that long ago.

    Bernanke said the Fed learned it’s lesson from the Great Depression. The Fed provides money to the banking system instead of say…JP Morgan the banker not the bank. twice! Yes JP Morgan the person not the bank bailed out the US banking system twice.

  47. 47
    Tatiana Kalashnikov says:

    RE: wreckingbull @ 43

    “Movie attendance peaked in 2002 and continues to fall. It is now at a 16 year low.”

    When your choices are Pirates of the Caribbean I, II or III, I can see why. Many movies today are just sophisticated action cartoons for simple people.

  48. 48
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ 46 – Life is about learning, and Bernanke may be up for another lesson. Both Bernanke and Greenspan missed the rather obvious housing bubble. Doesn’t inspire confidence.

  49. 49
    David Losh says:

    RE: wreckingbull @ 43

    Here’s the link, which you scanned, but didn’t read, http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/movie-attendance-down-mission-impossible-box-office-276699

    It’s an irrelevant diversion from the fact that rural communities have fewer amenities to offer a transplanted work force. You picked Prineville in Central Oregon. After Les Schwab left they didn’t have a movie theater. I thought that was odd. I’m sure they have one now with all the new doings going on with FaceBook.

    You also bypassed the fact that the person speaking in the video you linked was affiliated with a company called InSourcing. The idea is that we can use our Yankee ingenuity to get our rural work force working again doing manufacturing.

    It is always the same tired thinking that if we build it they will come. Well, they left.

    Our over educated work force will continue to want high dollar amenities. They will be paid well, and want to live well. Country living, or even living on the beach, is great for a while, but some day people wake up, and want more.

    I only care about the Real Estate aspect. It has nothing to do with a chosen lifestyle. I’m just saying that rural America, the same as rural anywhere else, is a Real Estate market that will tank. I’m surprised it hasn’t happened already.

  50. 50
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ 48:

    RE: pfft @ 46 – Life is about learning, and Bernanke may be up for another lesson. Both Bernanke and Greenspan missed the rather obvious housing bubble. Doesn’t inspire confidence.

    but Bernanke response has been more inspiring than his views on the housing bubble. right now he isn’t doing enough. at this rate the unemployment rate will take forever to get back to normal. we’ll probably have another recession before it gets back to normal. that’s how slowly the unemployment rate is coming down. he needs to do more QE or more of something.

  51. 51
    pfft says:

    I wonder if people realize that during the Great Depression the money supply fell by 30%! the Fed was not doing it’s job.

  52. 52
    David Losh says:

    RE: pfft @ 50

    He can’t, shouldn’t, and won’t. The more money pumped into the economy the worse it will get. Unemployment is a thing of the past. People need to adapt to our new economy. It’s never going back to normal as you know it.

    Let’s say we have been kicking the can down the road since the 1970s when we were held hostage, again, by the oil industry. We already had a military melt down that did nothing but drain our resources. The banking industry tried to prop up the economy, along with the stock market in the 1980s. We had a tech revolution in the 1990s, and here we are today with nothing but debt to show for all of it.

    Until we pay debt there is no amount of stimulus that will do anything, but make matters worse.

  53. 53
    pfft says:

    By David Losh @ 52:

    RE: pfft @ 50

    He can’t, shouldn’t, and won’t. The more money pumped into the economy the worse it will get. Unemployment is a thing of the past. People need to adapt to our new economy. It’s never going back to normal as you know it.

    that’s just wrong and the justification for Bernake’s policies go all the way back to the 30s…you think we would have learned by now.

  54. 54

    By pfft @ 41:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 31:

    From a CNN article:

    “With record profits and rising production, I’m not worried about the big oil companies,” Obama said in the White House Rose Garden. “… I think it’s time they got by without more help from taxpayers, who are having a tough enough time paying their bills and filling up their tanks.”

    Apparently President Obama thinks the American people are stupid, and don’t realize that incentives to produce more oil will produce more oil and lead to lower prices. Or he thinks we have enough oil, and is happy with the price of oil.

    no, the cost of oil will be exactly the same except it will be shifted from the taxpayers to people that use oil. it’s kind of like saying a pollution(carbon) tax will increase prices. no, it will just shift the cost from the public to the users of carbon reflecting the true cost.

    As usual, you missed the point and don’t understand economic issues.

    The incentives at issue increase the supply of oil, which has the effect of lowering the price of oil. Supply has been increasing, but worldwide demand has been increasing faster. But for these incentives the past several years, the price of oil would be higher, and the supply increases that President Obama brags about would be less.

    But at least now we know why President Obama is making the claim! :-D

  55. 55

    By pfft @ 46:

    By Blurtman @ 44:

    RE: pfft @ 40 – There were banking panics after the establishment of the Federal Reserve. Some doozies in 1930 and 1931, for example. The establishment of deposit insurance is credited with ending savings bank panics. There were runs on Lehman Brothers and Bear Sterans not all that long ago.

    Bernanke said the Fed learned it’s lesson from the Great Depression. The Fed provides money to the banking system instead of say…JP Morgan the banker not the bank. twice! Yes JP Morgan the person not the bank bailed out the US banking system twice.

    WAMU was arguably taken down by a bank run. It probably would have happened anyway, but it didn’t help. And there were others.

  56. 56

    By Tatiana Kalashnikov @ 47:

    RE: wreckingbull @ 43

    “Movie attendance peaked in 2002 and continues to fall. It is now at a 16 year low.”

    When your choices are Pirates of the Caribbean I, II or III, I can see why. Many movies today are just sophisticated action cartoons for simple people.

    Your best post ever!

  57. 57

    By David Losh @ 49:

    It’s an irrelevant diversion from the fact that rural communities have fewer amenities to offer a transplanted work force..

    John Muir is rolling over in his grave.

    The rural environment is the amenity. Building stuff would ruin it!

    Again, not everyone wants shopping malls and movie theaters just because that’s what you like.

  58. 58
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 57

    wreckingbulls point is that people will telecommute from rural areas, they won’t. An urban migration won’t reverse because high speed internet is available. Rural living is a choice that includes cultural realities, things like we don’t need a movie theater. Rural living is a culture. If you live that lifestyle you can blend in or be an outsider.

  59. 59

    By David Losh @ 58:

    wreckingbulls point is that people will telecommute from rural areas, they won’t. .

    Yes they will, because not everyone shares your values.

    It won’t be a lot of people, but it will be more than what it was without broadband being available in the area. That will allow more people to make that choice that couldn’t make that choice before.

  60. 60
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 54:

    By pfft @ 41:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ 31:

    From a CNN article:

    “With record profits and rising production, I’m not worried about the big oil companies,” Obama said in the White House Rose Garden. “… I think it’s time they got by without more help from taxpayers, who are having a tough enough time paying their bills and filling up their tanks.”

    Apparently President Obama thinks the American people are stupid, and don’t realize that incentives to produce more oil will produce more oil and lead to lower prices. Or he thinks we have enough oil, and is happy with the price of oil.

    no, the cost of oil will be exactly the same except it will be shifted from the taxpayers to people that use oil. it’s kind of like saying a pollution(carbon) tax will increase prices. no, it will just shift the cost from the public to the users of carbon reflecting the true cost.

    As usual, you missed the point and don’t understand economic issues.

    The incentives at issue increase the supply of oil, which has the effect of lowering the price of oil. Supply has been increasing, but worldwide demand has been increasing faster. But for these incentives the past several years, the price of oil would be higher, and the supply increases that President Obama brags about would be less.

    But at least now we know why President Obama is making the claim! :-D

    you don’t understand. price of oil isn’t any lower as a result. the $4 billion is spent anyway.

  61. 61
    David Losh says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 59

    No they won’t. High Speed internet may make an option, but people, the vast majority of people will continue to live the life they have chosen. Even if people do choose to live in rural America, there are many rules that go along with that. These are cloistered communities. So a person would have to adapt to that life style. It’s a difficult choice to make. How many people will be suited to the task of that adaptation?

  62. 62

    By pfft @ 60:

    you don’t understand. price of oil isn’t any lower as a result. the $4 billion is spent anyway.

    So you think there is increased supply without the cost being lower than it would be without that increased supply?

    Again, at least we know why President Obama is making these absurd claims to the American people. Americans are largely ignorant when it comes to economics.

Leave a Reply

Use your email address to sign up with Gravatar for a custom avatar.
Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Please read the rules before posting a comment.