James Quinn

What’s My Payment?

You have a great weekend too. It is pouring rain here. I'll spend my night in a hockey rink working on the next article.


On Sep 11 04:28 PM ArtfulDodger wrote:

> Now James, you know how I'm against debt in most cases, and most
> especially in buying luxury items.
>
> Certainly, I've found it insane (or perhaps suicidal) that the US
> government is promoting its citizens to take on more debt when too
> much debt is what got the nation into mess we're in now.
>
> And guess who promoted---and yes even ordered---the creation of the
> debt that got us to this point: our old favorite, that Warring Warthog
> in Washington.
>
> Hey James, I think I'll write Jimmy Carter and see if there's anyone
> at Habitat who would like a nice Patek. My wife has a favorite Baume
> Mercier I bought her in 1980. I think I'll grab it and throw it in
> there too.
>
> Or perhaps Greenpeace needs a little money; they've been working
> hard out here flying balloons and advertizing, claiming that global
> warming is causing the wild fires to get worse.
>
> But it's been a super cool summer here, and the Pacific has been
> cooler. And James quite opposite to the Atlantic the cooler weather
> makes this area drier.
>
> I suppose they don't know that, because no way they would put out
> false information to try to accomplish one of their goals. Eh?<br/>
>
> Have a good weekend. Give the kids a hug for me, will ya?

What’s My Payment?

Read the whole article here. SA only chose to publish part.

theburningplatform.com...

The $19 trillion of equity and $53 trillion of net worth is concentrated in the top 10%. The bottom 90% have the problem.


On Sep 11 01:07 PM Albert Meyer wrote:

> Good article, thanks.
>
> "The $10.5 trillion of mortgage debt will need to be paid down or
> written off over many years, before the housing market will reach
> equilibrium again"
>
> Isn't this a little bit extreme? The collateral value of the $10.5
> trillion of mortgage debt is $19 trillion, not so?
>
> Total US household net worth is $53 trillion, not so?
>
> Just trying to add another perspective, although there is nothing
> about your article that should make us proud, but then our government
> leads the way, not so? A healthcare program will add another $1 trillion
> to national debt over the next ten years - low-balling the estimate
> of course. Do they undertsand what the word "immoral" means.
>
> The war was supposed to cost $80 billion... $908 billion and counting.
> This makes household debt fade into insignificance.
>
> costofwar.com/

What’s My Payment?

You can keep them, as long as you didn't borrow to buy them.

You aren't allowed on this site. TBP rules!!!!


On Sep 11 08:36 AM ArtfulDodger wrote:

> James:
>
> Rolexes are way too nouveau riche for me. I mainly wear a Patek,
> but I won it playing gin back in the 1970s. Is that all right?<br/>
>
> I do have Tiffany Platinum Diamond Mother of Pearl and Corum Ten
> Dollar Gold Piece watches that I wear sometimes. I also bought them
> back in the 1970s.
>
> Do I have to give them away now? Don't make me, please! I still like
> them. They're pretty.

What’s My Payment?

Wow. You've put some major thought into this issue. I think you would really like the discussion on my site.

theburningplatform.com...


On Sep 10 05:56 PM User 353732 wrote:

> Excessive debt(i.e debt beyond the ability to repay) to finance instant
> gratification (of material whims and fancies, not just necessities)
> is not merely a financial perversion, it is a social pathology that
> afflicts a majority of citizens.
>
> It is a financial perversion by the wanton borrower who will not
> or cannot repay, because it is theft, whether by unwitting outcome
> or premeditated design. It is a financial perversion by the lender
> who lends despite a manifest lack of credit worthiness of the borrower.
> The lender who lends recklessly to satisfy the lust for instant fees
> and bonuses is a co-conspirator in the borrower's crime. The lender
> who then syndicates the bad loan is also a thief, who steals from
> other, distant, investors.
> It is a social pathology because it is born of the malignant double
> helix of entitlements and envy. Entitlements that say we can consume
> more than we produce, we can earn more than the value we create for
> others, we can take far more than we are willing to give.....and
> we can do it without ill consequences for ourselves and without caring
> what harm it may visit on others.
> Envy that covets what our neighbor has even though we do not have
> the merit(or luck or access to patronage) that our neighbor has;
> envy seeks equality of outcomes and has little interest in equality
> of opportunity or equality of contribution or equality of plain good
> fortune.
>
> Excessive debt is not a financial abstraction:it is a concrete social
> malignancy.
>
> Inevitably private entitlements and envy become public programs and
> policies and via the consent of the bribed, the deluded, the greedy
> and the uncaring, private pathologies become public pathologies.
> Once public, these pathologies, metastasize, multiply and spread.
> We turn from specific individuals degraded by envy and entitlements
> to a Polity thoroughly infected by National envy and National entitlements.
> Inexorably, the Polity turns to ever monstrous deficits at every
> level of government and in our economic relationships with the world.
> Deficits at home and internationally can only be satisfied with debt
> and when ethical debt is no longer adequate, the Polity turns to
> unethical debt via fiat money.
> This is the multi-decade trajectory that began in the 1960s and is
> now in its hyperkinetic phase.
> Unless, altered the public trajectory will first lead to the moral
> bankruptcy of the Nation(the very top of American society is already
> at the stage; the Middle class is not yet there, as a whole; while
> the Lower class is now so completely conditioned by its carefully
> nurtured entitlements and envies that it cannot distinguish between
> getting and deserving..economic amorality rules). In turn, this will
> lead to sordid, de-facto ( not de-jure because the Bosses will inflate
> or otherwise repudiate their way of the debt) financial bankruptcy.
>
> The Middle Class can reform the system(or interlocking set of systems)
> now by first reconsidering its own priorities and values and then
> acting------or it can wait to build anew, after the disaster , pain
> and humiliation of the National fall. The reform could be mostly
> done in a decade; the rebuilding could take at least a generation,
> maybe two, assuming a hostile and contemptuous world gives us the
> time to do so.
> Excessive, persistent, materialism will not just make us fat or sick
> or poor: it can consume the very substance of our Nation.

Big Banks in Trouble: Huge Mortgage Write-Downs Seem Inevitable

The entire charade is about to be revealed.

theburningplatform.com...

Is There Any Limit to Bank Arrogance?

NO. THERE AREN"T ENOUGH PRISONS FOR THESE CRIMINALS.

theburningplatform.com...

Do You Believe Borrowing Leads to Prosperity? (Part 2)

You are right. The masses will always vote for more free stuff. Ultimately, this will collapse the whole system. An unsustainable trend can't be sustained.


On May 11 04:09 PM kurtieboy wrote:

> James, I agree with just about everything you have said. My only
> comments to your piece are:
>
> 1) I do not believe the government's true intent is evil or bad as
> you seem to imply. Faced with the situation they are in they really
> have no choice but to reinflate. Public confidence in the ponzi scheme
> is critical to an improvement in the economy. What would you have
> them do, let the banks and our financial system crash. The people
> did not vote them in to do that. The people voted them in to keep
> the system working by what ever means at their disposal. Keep the
> party going so to speak and we'll worry about the repercussions afterward.
> Realistically could you see anyone getting voting in with a platform
> of let the financial system fail, we as a country and a people need
> to take a major hit to our standard of living and start living within
> our means! Good luck! Not going to happen! Won't get voted in! In
> many ways the problem America is facing is democracy by the masses
> has the potential to lead to this type of situation and I am not
> sure we have the strength to get out.

Do You Believe Borrowing Leads to Prosperity? (Part 2)

I've been shorting the 10 Year Treasury and 30 Year Treasury for 2 months. I expect it to be greatest investment of my life thanks to Obama, Bernanke, Geithner and their merry men. 6.9% coming down the track like a freight train. It won't stop there.


On May 08 02:48 PM kennypowers09 wrote:

> And the 40 year historical average yield for the 10 year is 6.9%.
> At its current level its level even NOW after "soaring" its still
> lower than any other 10 year treasury yield in since 1/31/62 (excluding
> the period between 11/19/08 through today's date. If we will play
> with %'s here then the current rate is STILL 114% lower than the
> AVERAGE 10 year treasury yield (since 1961). Its ironic how the rates
> are "soaring" when they are currently 375.81% (1371.99% annualized)
> below the HIGHEST the 10 year ever was which was on 9/81 at almost
> 15.847%. Now given the amount of "stimulus" that will reportedly
> "destroy" the US (of which many on this website complain about and
> greater than any other period within this time frame since the 60's),
> its ironic that rates would be at such a historical low. I believe
> that is far from currentl "soaring". As stated earlier the economy
> and velocity of money will have to increase before you will see rates
> rise.

Do You Believe Borrowing Leads to Prosperity? (Part 2)

I hate to play semantics too.

The 10 Year Treasury was 2.18% on 12/26/08.

The 10 Year Treasury is 3.30% on 5/8/09.

That is a 51% increase in 5 months. I would say that an annualized increase of 122% is soaring in most people's books.

Everyone sees what they want to see.


On May 08 10:52 AM kennypowers09 wrote:

> I hate to play semantics, but you specifically stated "soaring" long
> term rates and then cited an article with a trivial increase of a
> historically low long term rate on the 10 year (which i showed are
> still well below the historical average, and at one point hit 50
> year lows). Of course long term rates will increase and likely inflation
> along with it given the amount of stimulus. that will only occur
> once the general economy begins to see gains and velocity picks up,
> which could be for some time as the current economic numbers simply
> show "stabilization" and not "growth".
>

Do You Believe Borrowing Leads to Prosperity? (Part 2)

Keep looking in the past. Don't try and look ahead. How could LT rates possibly rise when we need to issue $2 trillion of new debt? Hmm. I'm sure demand will be tremendous for 30 year debt at 4% when the country issuing it plans to continue printing and spending on Obama's social agenda and stimulus pork. Keep believing those government figures. You are just the type of citizen our government wants.


On May 07 04:52 PM kennypowers09 wrote:

> have you even looked at the yield curve? long term rates are FAR
> from "soaring" at a 4.304% yield. the 20 year average (from 12/1/80
> to 6/29/90) for the 30 year treasury is currently 10.39%.

Do You Believe Borrowing Leads to Prosperity? (Part 2)

Switch will be flipped while your praising Bennie and the Jets. Nothing like soaring LT rates in the midst of a depression.

China's central bank frets over Fed bond purchases

By Laura Mandaro, MarketWatch
Last update: 2:10 p.m. EDT May 7, 2009Comments: 167SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Chinese bank authorities warned the Federal Reserve's programs to pump more cash into the financial system by buying $300 billion in Treasurys risked jolting bond prices and devaluing the dollar.
The overnight comments from the world's biggest holder of U.S. government debt helped depress Treasury prices in trading Thursday, said one analyst.
In a monetary report dated Wednesday and posted on the People's Bank of China's Web site, the central bank said the quantitative easing policy pursued by the Fed may help keep bond yields at low levels in the short term.
But over a longer period, higher inflation expectations, interest rates and central bank measures to take extra liquidity out of the system could cause a sharp adjustment to bond prices, the report said.
The central bank also said plans by the Fed and other central banks to drive lending rates lower by buying their own government debts risks depreciating major currencies.
The report "has been making the rounds overnight and is partially responsible for the selling pressure in Treasurys," said Ian Lyngen, interest-rate strategist at RBS Securities, in emailed comments early Thursday.
Ten-year Treasurys (UST10Y:U.S. Treasury 10 Year
News , chart , profile , more
Last: 3.15-0.01-0.19%

11:33pm 05/06/2009

Delayed quote dataAdd to portfolio
Analyst
Create alert Insider
Discuss
Financials
Sponsored by:
UST10Y 3.15, -0.01, -0.2%) recently yielded 3.312%, up 11 basis points for the day, as prices sold off further after a Treasury auction. Yields and prices move in opposite directions; 1 basis point is 1/100th of a percentage point. See Bond Report.
In recent months, senior Chinese officials have expressed concern that the U.S. financial crisis and efforts by policymakers to lower lending rates by flooding the system with cash would impair the value of its massive U.S. bond holdings.
On March 18, the Fed said it would buy up to $300 billion in Treasurys and expand a previous program of buying mortgage-related debt. The move sparked a big rally in Treasurys and knocked the U.S. dollar, though Treasurys have given up those gains since then.
China has also pushed for the establishment of an alternative to the U.S. dollar as a reserve holding.
Having driven short-term interest rates near zero, the Fed and other developed economies' central banks have embarked on variations of what's known as "quantitative easing," or using tools besides interest rates to increase money supply.
On Thursday, the Bank of England expanded its program of buying government bonds to 125 billion pounds ($189 billion) from 75 billion pounds.
And the European Central Bank, which cut its interest rates to a record low of 1% Thursday, said it would buy $80 billion in covered bonds, a type of bonds backed by mortgages or public-sector loans. See full story on ECB and BOE decision.
Moves to drive yields lower can come at a cost to existing bondholders if the flood of new money eventually sparks higher inflation, which erodes the value of bond holdings.



On May 07 04:19 PM kennypowers09 wrote:

> I think the current economic numbers show we are in far from a 50%
> reduction in GDP (of which those in the Great Depression experience)
> than that of our current yoy -2.6% GDP. The Chinese are far from
> calling the shots. As you well know they are still an infant and
> are still an export driven economy, with very important ties to the
> US consumer. When they flip the switch...then maybe they will be
> calling the shots. While they are certainly the largest US debtor,
> it takes two to tango, are rely just as heavily on our ability to
> return that principal than simply "running the show". They are simply
> hedging the weak dollar by buying commodities and materials, and
> for very good reason. The fact they ARE able to make such manuever's
> is their ability to use sovreign wealth funds, of which the US is
> simply far behind the 8 ball in terms of being able to participate
> in the global rat race for resources. Of course Ron Paul would never
> allow the US to do so, which makes China's ability to "control the
> world" inevitable and your complaining useless.

Do You Believe Borrowing Leads to Prosperity? (Part 2)

Kenny Kenny Kenny

We are in the midst of a Great Depression and you don't even know it. You're mistaking a bear market rally for a recovery. Look closely at some of the charts in the article. The debt party is coming to end. The Chinese are calling the shots, not Helicopter Ben and his band of merry men. Ben is a gentleman and a scholar and an idiot. He thought we had a strong economy with a strong healthy housing market 18 months ago. What a sage he is. Read some of his comments from 2007. Continue to live in your debt induced fantasy world.


On May 07 04:03 PM kennypowers09 wrote:

> Had Ron Paul had his way, we would have already been in another Great
> Depression. Bernanke, while you may disagree with him, is one of
> the world's most foremost scholar's on the subject and the consensus
> showed that a gold standard limited the ability of the government
> to control and expand money supplies, which continued to drag the
> economy longer than neccessary. Another correlation is the fact that
> the countries that dropped the gold standard the fast, were the first
> to enter out of contractions (lastly being france I believe). If
> you want a gold standard, go ahead and ask for a 50% GDP contraction,
> and triple digit inflation along with it, b/c our economy has simply
> expanded far beyond the use and supply of the extremely maluable,
> and far less important rock that is gold. zimbabwe would be a fantastic
> place to live for gold standard advocates.

Do You Believe Borrowing Leads to Prosperity? (Part 2)

There sure is a shortage of land in the world. Let's hang our hat on our farm land.


On May 07 03:41 PM kennypowers09 wrote:

> good thing the US has all the farm land (20% of the global ariable
> to be exact) and all the food.
>
> a growing global population wont need that right?
>
> the US economy will certainly never have such a dominant role in
> the global economy going forward. you could even call such dominance
> a bubble if you will. that said, the US will still be a very important
> player.

Do You Believe Borrowing Leads to Prosperity? (Part 2)

Representative Ron Paul from Texas prior to questioning Helicopter Ben yesterday:

We have to come to the realization that there is a sea change in what’s happening. This is an end of an era and that we can’t re-inflate the bubble, just as we devised a new system of Bretton Woods in ‘44 which was doomed to fail. It failed in ‘71 and then we came up with the dollar reserve standard which was a paper standard; it was doomed to fail and we have to recognize that it has failed. And if we think we can re-inflate the bubble by artificially creating credit out of thin air and calling it capital; believe me, we don’t have a prayer of solving these problems. We have a total misunderstanding of what credit is vs. capital. Capital can’t come from the thin air creation by the Federal Reserve System; capital has to come from savings. We have to work hard, produce, live within our means and what is left over is called capital. This whole idea that we can re-capitalize markets by merely turning on the printing presses and increasing credit is a total fallacy; so the sooner we wake up to realize that a new system has to be devised, the better.

Right now I think the Central Bankers of the world realize exactly what I’m talking about and they’re planning, but they’re planning another system that goes one step further to internationalize regulations, internationalize the printing press. Give up on the dollar standard, but we have to be very much aware that that system will be no more viable. We have to have a system which encourages people to work and to save. What do we do now? We’re telling consumers to spend and continue the old process; it won’t work.

Do You Believe Borrowing Leads to Prosperity? (Part 2)

Would you like to? I think you'd fit in perfectly.


On May 07 03:38 PM kennypowers09 wrote:

> Nope
>
> On May 07 03:02 PM James Quinn wrote: