Weekly Open Thread (2015-03-16)

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 week of March 16th, 2015. 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.

Note: The comment limit in open threads is 25 comments per person.

NOTICE: If you have comments to make about politics or economics that do not somehow directly relate to Seattle-area real estate, they may be posted in the current Politics & Economics Open Thread.  If you post such comments here, they will be moved 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.

40 comments:

  1. 1

    Hey, I’m the First to Blog

    That means I get to choose a topic to get everyone clicking on their keyboards.

    Assessed property values going way down for 2015 looking through my periscope. SE King County property taxes fell 25% YOY for SWE [Whoppie!!!]. My rental in Kansas City fell 12% in assessed value from $59K to $52K. Bear in mind the rental is a 1500 sq foot 3 bdrm rambler on a beautiful 1/2 acre with a deep green belt in back of it. Rents for this house are $600/mo, sounds like they’ll fall to $500./mo…

    Other periscope news from SWE: Retirement plans look good now. Lower wages with no America manufacturing and $45/bbl oil [to stay?] mean one good thing….retirement works [lower prices or stabilized prices look good to predict now, welcome to the evolving Depression….LOL] if you have a pension and/or invested like 10% of your gross income in Mutual Funds American Stocks since 911 and left it there [like I did]. I ran the numbers and my current take home pay working is about the same as retiring early for me. Why am I working? The saga of SWE on Seattle Bubble now will be retired SWE, likely by year’s end….LOL….I’m gonna empty my giant stock annuity fund as fast as possible after retirement and stick it in my generous(?) 0.35% Money Market cash account ASAP [like that advertisement turn your annuity into CASH NOW]. Who in their right mind would save money in a 10 year CD at 1-2% and pay a penalty to leverage with it or just buy Hell Cats and lavish vacations….the Golden Years early for SWE. Hey, I went dancing all night Saturday until 330AM….I’m prime to retire with great health and no grey hair either….LOL

  2. 2
  3. 3
    Blurtman says:

    RE: softwarengineer @ – ” The saga of SWE on Seattle Bubble now will be retired SWE, likely by year’s end….LOL….I’m gonna empty my giant stock annuity fund as fast as possible after retirement …”

    You have just guaranteed a market crash.

  4. 4
    js says:

    Hopefully this is not an inappropriate question for the forum.

    I’m selling my Greenlake rental house to my tenants, it’s scheduled to close in 2 weeks. This is my first house sale. Since it seems like a very simple deal and I hate lawyers, I’ve decided to go it on my own, using mr. google as my lawyer (he’s my doctor as well). The tenants are also unrepresented.

    We’ve used the standard NWMLS Purchase and Sale agreement, with a financing contingency (22A) and lead paint addendum (22J). They are buying the house “as-is”, so there was no inspection contingency. They’ve also signed a Form 17, that included everything I know about the property in gory detail (blocked sewer line, rodent infestations, possible termite damage, oil tank, etc).

    We’re using Old Republic for the title insurance and escrow. The appraisal has come through, financing is set and it looks like we’re ready to sign.

    Question: I’ve disclosed everything I know in the Form 17. Do I still need to get a lawyer to look over the contract before I sign? Are there any online lawyers who would look over the contract via email? I really don’t want to have to meet them in person, smell their expensive cologne, shake their clammy manicured hands and look into their soulless eyes.

    Thanks for any suggestions.

  5. 5
    pfft says:

    You mean the media and pundits overreacted?

    Even After All The Email Attention, Hillary Still Leads Entire 2016 Field
    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/polltracker/cnn-hillary-leads-likely-2016-field

  6. 6

    RE: js @
    Kary May Help You With Legal

    Albeit, it sounds like you have the escrow paperwork in order….possibly an hour or two in a real estate attorney’s office should at least put the light on any risk you’ve missed and define it’s probability too. Perhaps you can find one to do it through email, but don’t hire one until you have a max hour(s) allowed contract negotiated.

  7. 7

    RE: pfft @
    The Clinton Name is Well Known

    Also, a little crime and fraud bounces off most politicians like a super ball.

  8. 8

    RE: Blurtman @

    LOL Blurtman

    Yes, I’m converting all my stock investments to a 2.5% 401K type long-term regular savings annuity…then later, ASAP, get it out of that none locked box annuity account. I’m still going to blog on Bubble, but with no “skin in the game” [job dependent for home mortgage]….LOL

    The stock market may keep on rising or collapse as you said….but I milked it since 911 and buying during any major collapse is perfect timing, at least in my case.

  9. 9

    America the 3rd World Country

    Snippet:

    “….As Mr. Stansberry writes:

    “No one believed me years ago when I said the world’s largest mortgage bankers would soon go bankrupt.

    And no one believed me when I said GM would fall apart… or that the same would happen to General Growth Properties.

    But that’s exactly what happened.”

    And, he says, that brings us today…

    Stansberry says the next big bankruptcy in America will be even bigger than those he’s identified in the past. In fact, he says this looming bankruptcy will threaten your way of life, whether you own any investments related to it or not.

    This collapse, says Stansberry, will change everything about our normal way of life: where you vacation… where you send your kids or grandkids to school… how and where you shop… the way you protect your family and home….”

    http://thecrux.com/dyncontent/going-bankrupt-next-in-america-mf/?cid=MKT015071&eid=MKT025175

  10. 10
    Blake says:

    By pfft @ :

    You mean the media and pundits overreacted?

    Even After All The Email Attention, Hillary Still Leads Entire 2016 Field
    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/polltracker/cnn-hillary-leads-likely-2016-field

    BS… Here’s a critical piece written by a lifelong Democrat and expert on freedom of information:
    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/03/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-defense-laughable-foia-116116.html
    -snip- thought when I retired from the Justice Department in 2007, I was done with records-related scandals. By that point, I had spent more than a quarter-century as founding director of the Justice Department’s Office of Information and Privacy, effectively serving as the federal government’s chief information-disclosure “guru.” In that position, I had weathered many a Clinton records scandal during the 1990s—about two dozen, all told, including two that amazingly have still never become public—and I thought I had seen the last of them. At the very least, I thought I had become immune to being shocked by anything in that vein.

    It turns out I was wrong on both counts….
    the Federal Records Act’s documentation and preservation requirements still called upon that official (or a staff assistant) to forward any such email into the State Department’s official records system, where it would have been located otherwise.
    … In this case, which is truly unprecedented, no matter what Secretary Clinton would have one believe, she managed successfully to insulate her official emails, categorically, from the FOIA, both during her tenure at State and long after her departure from it—perhaps forever.

    Now, what Secretary Clinton would have one believe is that this is all just a matter of her choosing one available email option over another, that she really did nothing that her predecessors had not done before her and that she can be trusted to “have absolutely confidence” that what she did “fully complied with every rule that [she] was governed by.” In other words, the thrust of her March 10 press conference was: “Everything was fine, nothing to be seen here, so let’s all just move along.”

    But having spent a quarter-century at the forefront of the government’s administration of the FOIA, including its transition to electronic records and its involvement in so many Clinton administration “scandals du jour,” I know full well that both what Secretary Clinton arranged to do and what she now has said about that are, to put it most charitably, not what either the law or anything close to candor requires. At a minimum, it was a blatant circumvention of the FOIA by someone who unquestionably knows better and an attempted verbal “cover” of the situation (if not “cover-up”) that is truly reminiscent of years past.

    And I say that even as someone who, if she decides to run for president and is the Democratic nominee, will nevertheless vote for her next year.

    (Dan Metcalfe spent more than thirty years working at the U.S. Department of Justice, at which he served from 1981 to 2007 as director of the Office of Information and Privacy, where he was responsible for overseeing the implementation of the FOIA throughout the entire executive branch. He now teaches secrecy law at American University’s Washington College of Law.)
    (end quote)

    Hillary sets another bad precedent and in the future would we expect that other top government officials would do all their (“our”) buisness on their own e-mail servers and delete whatever e-mails they wouldn’t want anyone to see (or get by FOIA request) and then pfft and other lackies will say “no problem!?” Really pfft? This is OK? Hillary has shown again that she is an unethical person and I hope she is not nominated because she is a abrasive, arrogant, a liar and a liability to any Democratic progressive “reform.”
    Hillary likes secrecy…
    http://www.propublica.org/article/hillary-clintons-top-five-clashes-over-secrecy

  11. 11
    pfft says:

    By softwarengineer @ :

    America the 3rd World Country

    Snippet:

    “….As Mr. Stansberry writes:

    “No one believed me years ago when I said the world’s largest mortgage bankers would soon go bankrupt.

    And no one believed me when I said GM would fall apart… or that the same would happen to General Growth Properties.

    But that’s exactly what happened.”

    And, he says, that brings us today…

    Stansberry says the next big bankruptcy in America will be even bigger than those he’s identified in the past. In fact, he says this looming bankruptcy will threaten your way of life, whether you own any investments related to it or not.

    This collapse, says Stansberry, will change everything about our normal way of life: where you vacation… where you send your kids or grandkids to school… how and where you shop… the way you protect your family and home….”

    http://thecrux.com/dyncontent/going-bankrupt-next-in-america-mf/?cid=MKT015071&eid=MKT025175

    ha ha. I see that all the time. it’s basically an ad? what are you passing along ads?

    lemme guess, the american government is going to go bankrupt? I just have to subscribe to his website or buy his book? LOL.

  12. 12
    pfft says:

    By Blake @ :

    By pfft @ :

    You mean the media and pundits overreacted?

    Even After All The Email Attention, Hillary Still Leads Entire 2016 Field
    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/polltracker/cnn-hillary-leads-likely-2016-field

    BS… Here’s a critical piece written by a lifelong Democrat and expert on freedom of information:
    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/03/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-defense-laughable-foia-116116.html
    -snip- thought when I retired from the Justice Department in 2007, I was done with records-related scandals. By that point, I had spent more than a quarter-century as founding director of the Justice Department’s Office of Information and Privacy, effectively serving as the federal government’s chief information-disclosure “guru.” In that position, I had weathered many a Clinton records scandal during the 1990s—about two dozen, all told, including two that amazingly have still never become public—and I thought I had seen the last of them. At the very least, I thought I had become immune to being shocked by anything in that vein.

    It turns out I was wrong on both counts….
    the Federal Records Act’s documentation and preservation requirements still called upon that official (or a staff assistant) to forward any such email into the State Department’s official records system, where it would have been located otherwise.
    … In this case, which is truly unprecedented, no matter what Secretary Clinton would have one believe, she managed successfully to insulate her official emails, categorically, from the FOIA, both during her tenure at State and long after her departure from it—perhaps forever.

    Now, what Secretary Clinton would have one believe is that this is all just a matter of her choosing one available email option over another, that she really did nothing that her predecessors had not done before her and that she can be trusted to “have absolutely confidence” that what she did “fully complied with every rule that [she] was governed by.” In other words, the thrust of her March 10 press conference was: “Everything was fine, nothing to be seen here, so let’s all just move along.”

    But having spent a quarter-century at the forefront of the government’s administration of the FOIA, including its transition to electronic records and its involvement in so many Clinton administration “scandals du jour,” I know full well that both what Secretary Clinton arranged to do and what she now has said about that are, to put it most charitably, not what either the law or anything close to candor requires. At a minimum, it was a blatant circumvention of the FOIA by someone who unquestionably knows better and an attempted verbal “cover” of the situation (if not “cover-up”) that is truly reminiscent of years past.

    And I say that even as someone who, if she decides to run for president and is the Democratic nominee, will nevertheless vote for her next year.

    (Dan Metcalfe spent more than thirty years working at the U.S. Department of Justice, at which he served from 1981 to 2007 as director of the Office of Information and Privacy, where he was responsible for overseeing the implementation of the FOIA throughout the entire executive branch. He now teaches secrecy law at American University’s Washington College of Law.)
    (end quote)

    Hillary sets another bad precedent and in the future would we expect that other top government officials would do all their (“our”) buisness on their own e-mail servers and delete whatever e-mails they wouldn’t want anyone to see (or get by FOIA request) and then pfft and other lackies will say “no problem!?” Really pfft? This is OK? Hillary has shown again that she is an unethical person and I hope she is not nominated because she is a abrasive, arrogant, a liar and a liability to any Democratic progressive “reform.”
    Hillary likes secrecy…
    http://www.propublica.org/article/hillary-clintons-top-five-clashes-over-secrecy

    I really don’t care. she should follow the laws and rules but the media acted like this could end her candidacy. I watched CNN and CNN said the scandal was “engulfing” hillary clinton. what a joke! nobody cares. that isn’t to say what she did was right but nobody cares.

  13. 13
    Blake says:

    RE: softwarengineer @
    SWE… this is great, says it all IMHO:
    http://www.salon.com/2015/03/19/the_1_percent_rigged_everything_why_no_one_can_end_ronald_reagans_dead_wrong_voodoo_economics/
    The 1 percent rigged everything: Why no one can end Ronald Reagan’s “dead wrong” voodoo economics:
    A thriving middle class is the cause of growth. The middle class creates rich people — not the other way around
    -snip- ““The problem I highlighted was that President Obama didn’t offer an alternative theory of growth,” Hanaauer said. “He could have, but he didn’t…. The problem with our politics is President Obama and the people who surround him, don’t represent an alternative to trickle down economics, they are trickle-down-lite,” Hanauer told me. “They’re sort of kinder-and-gentler trickle-down economics…. They still think that a thriving middle class is an effect of growth, a consequence of growth, and the truth is in a technological, modern economy, a thriving middle class is the cause of growth…. The middle class creates rich people, not the other way around.”
    (end quote… read the whole article… it is great.)

    The system is broken… with no checks and balances anymore. It is rigged by the monied interests and they are insatiable. NOTHING changed after 2008… they just printed money (monetized the debt) and borrowed it at 0% to buy back their own stocks etc. The next crash will be worse than the last and it is not a question of “if” but “when.” Good time to cash out and sit back SWE! Wish I could join you…

  14. 14
    pfft says:

    By Blake @ :

    RE: softwarengineer @
    SWE… this is great, says it all IMHO:
    http://www.salon.com/2015/03/19/the_1_percent_rigged_everything_why_no_one_can_end_ronald_reagans_dead_wrong_voodoo_economics/
    The 1 percent rigged everything: Why no one can end Ronald Reagan’s “dead wrong” voodoo economics:
    A thriving middle class is the cause of growth. The middle class creates rich people — not the other way around
    -snip- ““The problem I highlighted was that President Obama didn’t offer an alternative theory of growth,” Hanaauer said. “He could have, but he didn’t…. The problem with our politics is President Obama and the people who surround him, don’t represent an alternative to trickle down economics, they are trickle-down-lite,” Hanauer told me. “They’re sort of kinder-and-gentler trickle-down economics…. They still think that a thriving middle class is an effect of growth, a consequence of growth, and the truth is in a technological, modern economy, a thriving middle class is the cause of growth…. The middle class creates rich people, not the other way around.”
    (end quote… read the whole article… it is great.)

    The system is broken… with no checks and balances anymore. It is rigged by the monied interests and they are insatiable. NOTHING changed after 2008… they just printed money (monetized the debt) and borrowed it at 0% to buy back their own stocks etc. The next crash will be worse than the last and it is not a question of “if” but “when.” Good time to cash out and sit back SWE! Wish I could join you…

    ” The problem with our politics is President Obama and the people who surround him, don’t represent an alternative to trickle down economics, they are trickle-down-lite”

    nothing but a big lie!

    Obama says the economy grows best from the middle. Research suggests he’s right.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/07/24/obama-says-the-economy-grows-best-from-the-middle-research-suggests-hes-right/

  15. 15

    By softwarengineer @ :

    Hey, I’m the First to Blog

    That means I get to choose a topic to get everyone clicking on their keyboards.

    Assessed property values going way down for 2015 looking through my periscope. SE King County property taxes fell 25% YOY for SWE [Whoppie!!!]. My rental in Kansas City fell 12% in assessed value from $59K to $52K. Bear in mind the rental is a 1500 sq foot 3 bdrm rambler on a beautiful 1/2 acre with a deep green belt in back of it. Rents for this house are $600/mo, sounds like they’ll fall to $500./mo…

    Other periscope news from SWE: Retirement plans look good now. Lower wages with no America manufacturing and $45/bbl oil [to stay?] mean one good thing….retirement works [lower prices or stabilized prices look good to predict now, welcome to the evolving Depression….LOL] if you have a pension and/or invested like 10% of your gross income in Mutual Funds American Stocks since 911 and left it there [like I did]. I ran the numbers and my current take home pay working is about the same as retiring early for me. Why am I working? The saga of SWE on Seattle Bubble now will be retired SWE, likely by year’s end….LOL….I’m gonna empty my giant stock annuity fund as fast as possible after retirement and stick it in my generous(?) 0.35% Money Market cash account ASAP [like that advertisement turn your annuity into CASH NOW]. Who in their right mind would save money in a 10 year CD at 1-2% and pay a penalty to leverage with it or just buy Hell Cats and lavish vacations….the Golden Years early for SWE. Hey, I went dancing all night Saturday until 330AM….I’m prime to retire with great health and no grey hair either….LOL

    No grey hair? Why? Bald, or Grecian Formula?

  16. 16
    Cap'n says:

    Interesting report on residential mobility, renters v. owners, etc. Homeowners tied down, but apparently more committed to moving when they decide they want to.

    http://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2015/demo/p70-140.pdf

  17. 17
    Blurtman says:

    Will Money-laundering Scandal Derail Lynch Nomination?

    Friday’s news that French state financial prosecutors were joining with the Swiss government in pursuing charges that HSBC’s Swiss banking division was engaging in illegal tax dodges for their wealthy clients may have spelled the end of the nomination of Loretta Lynch (shown) to replace Eric Holder as U.S. Attorney General.

    Three years ago, Lynch caved in and let HSBC off the hook with a modest fine and a slap on the wrist following its investigation into the bank’s money-laundering activities that helped fund Middle East terrorists and Mexican drug cartels. Lynch’s agreement insulated guilty parties from criminal prosecution while allowing the bank’s money laundering activities to continue despite its agreeing to a “cease and desist” order.

    http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/congress/item/20427-will-money-laundering-scandal-derail-lynch-nomination

  18. 18

    RE: Blurtman @ – Searching Google news for her name that story isn’t getting a lot of traction. It does show how badly messed up politics is in DC though. Probably the recent NRA push against her will make more of a difference than that incident.

  19. 19
    pfft says:

    As usual neither of you are correct. it’s immigration that is holding up her nomination.

  20. 20
    pfft says:

    Hey look the SB commentariat is wrong again.

    China wants to spend $7.6 billion on cleaning up air pollution in order to host the winter Olympics

    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/china-wants-to-spend-76-billion-on-cleaning-up-air-pollution-in-order-to-host-the-winter-olympics-2015-3#ixzz3V4mTxIGP

  21. 21
    Blurtman says:

    RE: pfft @ – Yes, and that is really too bad as both parties care little about the law when it comes to the elite.

  22. 22

    By pfft @ :

    As usual neither of you are correct. it’s immigration that is holding up her nomination.

    I would agree with that overall. But the issue is what will be the tipping point if her vote goes down–the 51st vote against.

  23. 23

    By pfft @ :

    Hey look the SB commentariat is wrong again.

    China wants to spend $7.6 billion on cleaning up air pollution in order to host the winter Olympics

    Hey look, pfft proves he has no significant memory again (even though this is mentioned in the article he linked).

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/reducing-air-pollution-during-2008-beijing-olympics-boosted-residents-heart-health-research-reveals/

    But no one has ever said that China won’t do anything about air pollution.The topic was the one-sided agreement reached on reducing CO2 emissions. And in any case, air pollution is not synonymous with CO2. Over my lifetime air pollution in the US has been reduced dramatically, while our CO2 emissions have roughly doubled.

  24. 24
    Blurtman says:

    The Federal Reserve Bank Must Be Destroyed!

    During the years of the Roman Republic, Cato the Elder ended every speech with the phrase “Delanda est Carthago” (Kill the bankers).

    I believe that we Austrians need to adopt a similar phrase to remind the American people that the US faces an existential threat from the machinations of the Federal Reserve Bank. “Delanda est in Susidium Foederatum Bank”…The Federal Reserve Bank must be destroyed.

    http://mises.ca/posts/blog/the-federal-reserve-bank-must-be-destroyed/

  25. 25

    RE: Blurtman @ – You only have to read about halfway through that piece to know that guy is an idiot. His problem isn’t with the Fed, it’s with banks making loans. Following his advice would reduce the world’s economy to the level of Afghanistan’s. Also, such a business would make about as much sense as Saturday Night Live’s “Change Bank.”

    http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/first-citywide-change-bank/n9701

  26. 26
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ – Yes, I am not an Austrian. But I do think opening up the Fed to competition and ending their monopoly is an intriguing idea.

  27. 27
    whatsmyname says:

    RE: Blurtman @ – Which of the Fed’s tasks could be handled by competing institutions, and how would it be in the interests of those competitors to participate?

  28. 28

    RE: Blurtman @ – I’m sure there are some changes that could be made that would be positive. I just have a problem with that site’s arguments. The basic idea that the terms of loans should match the terms of deposits is absurd, and I don’t think he understands what causes bank runs, which is the real problem he is addressing.

    The more a bank loans relative to its level of deposits, the more risking it is. That’s something the fed regulates. But a bank having a run on deposits based on happenstance is about as likely as every box shipped via UPS from Seattle on Friday going to Friday Harbor. Both you and I might withdraw all our money from Bank X tomorrow, not every customer of the bank will do that, and to the extent customers do withdraw funds they tend to end up being re-deposited in other banks (ignoring the drug trade).

  29. 29

    RE: Blurtman @ – One more thought. I have a hard time seeing how private entities could have dealt with the 9/11 attack. The Fed did a lot immediately after the attacks to keep the systems functioning. I don’t know that entities would have had the same confidence in private entities taking the same actions.

  30. 30
    pfft says:

    By Blurtman @ :

    The Federal Reserve Bank Must Be Destroyed!

    During the years of the Roman Republic, Cato the Elder ended every speech with the phrase “Delanda est Carthago” (Kill the bankers).

    I believe that we Austrians need to adopt a similar phrase to remind the American people that the US faces an existential threat from the machinations of the Federal Reserve Bank. “Delanda est in Susidium Foederatum Bank”…The Federal Reserve Bank must be destroyed.

    http://mises.ca/posts/blog/the-federal-reserve-bank-must-be-destroyed/

    US recessions were terrible before the Fed. The Fed is doing a much better job. Before the Fed recessions were longer and deeper. We just need the Fed to do it’s job a little better.

    Austrian economics is basically in action in Europe, how is that going?

  31. 31
    pfft says:

    By Kary L. Krismer @ :

    RE: Blurtman @ – You only have to read about halfway through that piece to know that guy is an idiot. His problem isn’t with the Fed, it’s with banks making loans. Following his advice would reduce the world’s economy to the level of Afghanistan’s. Also, such a business would make about as much sense as Saturday Night Live’s “Change Bank.”

    http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/first-citywide-change-bank/n9701

    classic!

  32. 32
    pfft says:

    People have the cause of the Great Recession all wrong. It was not the Fed. The Fed basically took a laissez-faire toward housing and loans made by the big banks(although this is a problem). It was the big banks, those free market heroes, that screwed up. They got greedy and got burned. It was a laissez-faire/free market system that caused the crash, not a overbearing or over regulating federal reserve. Remember that Paulson while he was at Goldman lobbied for banks to take more risk.

    Hank Paulson And The Wall Street/Washington Axis Of Power
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertlenzner/2011/11/29/hank-paulson-and-the-wall-streetwashington-axis-of-power/

    Greenspan Concedes Error on Regulation
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/business/economy/24panel.html

    Mr. Greenspan admitted that he had put too much faith in the self-correcting power of free markets and had failed to anticipate the self-destructive power of wanton mortgage lending.

    “Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders’ equity, myself included, are in a state of shocked disbelief,” he told the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

    notice how I provide links and evidence to back up claims?

  33. 33
    Blurtman says:

    RE: whatsmyname @ – Candidate Yellen and bank consortium x vs. candidate (fill in the blank) and bank consortium y.

  34. 34
    whatsmyname says:

    RE: Blurtman @ – Do you imagine that banks do not already lobby for their individual and group interests in nominations for the Fed’s management? Are you suggesting that picking a chief executive for the Fed is the basis for a competitive market to support entire financial control organizations?

    I must be misunderstanding your meaning. Or you are hiding behind a vague half-thought.

  35. 35
    Blurtman says:

    RE: whatsmyname @ – I am merely suggesting opening up the process to competition. A different consortium of banks hopefully offering different solutions than than the usual cast of criminals.

  36. 36
    whatsmyname says:

    RE: Blurtman @ – And I am merely asking you to convert your rhetoric to specificity. Competition in what activity? Consortium of what banks? (The Fed already has them all). This all sounds great if you have no understanding of what’s going on. But change and action -including competition – can only occur in concrete and specific reality.

  37. 37
    Blurtman says:

    RE: whatsmyname @ – Not all US banks are members of the Fed, as I hope you know. And when you are the only game in town, there isn’t much choice regarding membership if you want to join. Right now we have criminals running the show. Don’t you think being granted the ability to create money out of thin air is a privilege? It must be as not every organization can do this. And if you abuse that privilege through the issuance of bogus instruments in order to increase your earnings, shouldn’t you not only lose that privilege as an institution, but do jail time as an individual? And if you are granted the coveted NRSRO status by the SEC, and you blatantly make up fictitious ratings again for personal profit, plunging the nation into a financial tailspin, don’t you think you should lose your NRSRO status? What you are seeing is the rot of an uninhibited monopoly system. And we know that monopolies are not good, so let’s end the Fed monopoly for starters.

  38. 38
    whatsmyname says:

    RE: Blurtman @ – Do you suppose there would be better control over money supply if multiple entities could print money at will? So you suppose that there could be a monetary policy at all in such circumstances? Do you suppose that if one entity with substantial scrutiny can be corrupted, that several entities with lesser scrutiny would not be? Is this your argument?

    Perhaps we should rid ourselves of monopoly government? Don’t like that court? Sorry, I’ll take my fraud trial to another court, your honor. Perhaps a competing army is the one to defend me. And please don’t tell me the Fed is a private business. After their statutory distributions, all profits go to the treasury. It’s not a big profit center for the banks. It is first and foremost a regulatory body with a lot of government management. The whole problem there was libertarian guidance: easing oversight to let the private hand work its magic.

    Even per pfft’s quote, Greenspan feels bad about stockholder impact, not societal impact. Don’t agree with their bailout strategy and TBTF. Well, neither do I. Tell me how competing Feds would have diminished that? No, wait, tell me how they wouldn’t have made it worse.

  39. 39
    whatsmyname says:

    RE: Blurtman @ RE: whatsmyname @
    p.s. Please excuse my tone. I am a teensy bit opinionated on this subject. I do enjoy your many humorous posts.

  40. 40
    Blurtman says:

    RE: Kary L. Krismer @ – I think the author is espousing a not uncommon belief (Shedlock, Denninger, et. al.) known as sound money. That is, that the reserve ratio of banks be 100%, i.e., banks only lend what they have in deposits. For example, if you want to lend your nephew Mortimer $50,000 for a down payment, but only have $5,000 in your checking account, you write the check for $50,000 and claim reserve ratio legitimacy. You would wind up in trouble. It is a bit amazing that when you borrow $500,000 from a bank to buy a home, that the bank may only have $50,000 on average backing the check they issue. More amazing is that the seller’s bank accepts the check, knowing that it is not fully backed by deposits on hand. Of course each bank is a cartel member and agrees to play by these rules. My only objection is that criminals should not have this right to create money.

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.