optionsgirl

Ben Bernanke Pleads for His Job; My Response to Bernanke

I'm thrilled to see you back on SA, Mr. Shedlock.

Report from Europe: Market Senses the Rally is Overdone

tx for the clip of Faber at the end

Pre-Funding TBTF Bailouts: Bair's Terrible Idea

Thanks for putting this in perspective. The regulators propose additional regulation and stealing funds to do this. No surprises there.That's not a big break between Sheila and Barrack ( maybe she does have her job on the line, I don't care about that.) They are only in disagreement on how to do it. Somehow, it's going to get done.
The US Taxpayers will ultimately be the ones to suffer and pay.

Report from Europe: A Grounded Boeing to Drag Down the Dow?

DB resembles its US banking brothers more and more!

Wall Street Breakfast: Must-Know News

Maybe it is time to take a page from Russian history, and overthrow the czar?

Preview from Europe: Banks Up on Expectation of Goldman Earnings

That's a wonderful idea Roger. But so long as the banks have the US Taxpayer to fall back on, there is no need for them to be creative. They don't need to get any more creative than a phone call to Tim Geitner. Perhaps those bankers think that if they renegotiate that mortgage, in 20 years, it still won't be back to where it was in 2005-6.


On Jul 14 08:20 AM Roger Knights wrote:

> Here is a quote that excited me from the Taleb/Spitznagel article:
>
>
> “The only solution is to transform debt into equity across all sectors,
> in an organised and systematic way. Instead of sending hate mail
> to near-insolvent homeowners, banks should reach out to borrowers
> and offer lower interest payments in exchange for equity.”
>
> I've been suggesting something similar here on SA for about eight
> months (in comments):
>
> "Why can't the gov't. take over where Rex & Co. left off, by
> offering homeowners a premium (say 15% of the house's current valuation)
> in exchange for a share of future profits (say 50% beyond its current
> market value) on the sale of the house? This would buffer the effects
> of the current crunch on the homeowner, allowing him to make his
> mortgage payments and/or renegotiate his mortgage, while being a
> good long-term buy for the gov't. It’s win/win."

The BofA / Merrill Mess - A Misguided Mob Goes After the Wrong Guy

Dear Clinton:
I think Mr. G's got that backwards-
Americans are tired of socialism, not capitalism. That's what we've got, isn't it? We've been heading toward socialism for the past 40+ years.

The Next Major Financial Crisis

This will never happen, Alessandro. The banks are back-stopped by the government at the taxpayer expense. Why should they do work-outs when they get to play with OUR money?


On Jun 28 08:58 PM Alessandro wrote:

> The looming credit card crisis can be earnestly papered over by waving
> all interest charges on all credit card debt that is over 3 years
> old. The credit card companies made plenty of money on interest
> charges during the first three years of the credit card debt, by
> waiving all interest charges on older debt, it enables literally
> tens of millions of americans the opportunity to PAY DOWN their credit
> card debt.
>
> There can be no economic recovery if the almost one trillion dollars
> in credit card debt is not paid down. Until consumer credit card
> debt is reduced in half, The closest we will see to a recovery is
> higher oil profits being invested in certain stocks to artificially
> pump them up and lure the unknowing in.
>
> www.daily-protest.com

Why Congress Is Asking Bernanke Bogus Questions

That's like a debate on Hitler v Stalin-who was the most evil?
Both Greenspan and Bernanke stink!


On Jun 27 08:25 PM Sovestor wrote:

> Bernanke is not that bogus vs. Greenspan.

Why Congress Is Asking Bernanke Bogus Questions

Great observation, Thiazole. Sounds like something from a George Orwell novel, doesn't it?


On Jun 26 11:43 AM thiazole wrote:

> In my opinion, politicians want as many scape goats to wag their
> fingers at as they can find so that they can avoid the spotlight
> on themselves. If they can just keep us angry at everyone but them,
> we might forget that it was their policies that ultimately got us
> into this mess in the first place.

Credit Card Charge Off Rate Highest in 20 Years - Moody's

I agreed with everything you said, until the last line. I do not understand what you mean, here. Would you please explain what you mean by de-industrialization? Are you saying we are no longer technical innovators?


On Jun 24 10:20 PM conceptwizard wrote:

> The “product” that the banking “industry” sells is debt – loans which,
> under today’s financial circumstances and tax favoritism for Wall
> Street, are extended in a way whose main effect is to inflate asset
> prices, not fund tangible capital formation. Rising prices for housing
> and commercial property, stocks and bonds, are taken as justification
> for yet more lending, backed by collateral being bid up in price.
> By loading the economy down with debt, this seeming “wealth creation”
> becomes a vicious circle increasing the economy’s financial carrying
> charge.
>
> Mr. Obama’s “reform” plan is that it seeks to sustain this dynamic,
> not reverse it. The plan does not acknowledge the symbiotic relationship
> between fiscal and financial policy. Cutting property taxes leaves
> more real estate rent, monopoly rent and asset-price gains “free”
> to be pledged to the banks for yet larger loans – pledged to pay
> more interest on the rising debt taken on to buy assets being inflated
> by the credit bubble.
>
> The resulting financial “enterprise” is different from industrial
> innovation. It consists largely of capturing congressional tax legislators
> so as to write small-print tax “loopholes” and more glaring tax breaks
> that shift the fiscal burden onto productive labor and industry.
> That is the essence of today’s “pay to play” democracy. Financializing
> the economy in this way has gone hand in hand with de-industrialization.
>

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

Dear Nobby: It is the American taxpayer who takes the risk on these assets. That's why everyone should be aware of precisely what our Congress, together with the Fed and Treasury, has done to the American people-- robbed us blind.


On Jun 23 08:02 PM nobby73 wrote:

> Am I the only one who's totally astonished that a guy on a commission
> only income can get $2m of loans for 7 properties? This sort of
> collective idiocy on the behalf of borrower and lenders makes me
> hugely worried about the stuff that's been dumped on the Fed, and
> I am still unclear about who takes the risk on these assets?

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

I don't view Gill's decision as a huge moral hazard. The hazard occurred because the banks lent under such ridiculous terms, at the insistence of the government, at rates determined by the Fed. They agreed to take the homes as collateral- let them choke on them. The only difference between Gill and the banks, is that the banks have the US Taxpayer to cover their defaults.
Glad JPM paid back TARP. All is right in the world.

Banking Crisis Not Yet Over

Krugman is a nobel prize winning cheerleader with socialist preferences, a perfect shill for the policies of Gordon Brown and Barack Obama.

Housing's Big Picture Isn't Pretty

I don't understand your comment, would you please explain:
What do you mean by "Bare land values?" ( Bare land in real estate circles is defined as land that hasn't been through permitting and approvals, not a permitted, buildable lot.) Are you saying that Toll and DR Horton incur averages costs of $30-50K per lot when building a new development, and does that exclude the cost of acquiring the raw land? Please, explain, and please don't be insulted. Thank you in advance for explaining what comprises "bare land values" to understand how you arrive at $30K-50K per lot from their annual reports.


On May 24 12:16 PM kotika98 wrote:

> what a bunch of bull! In America land is still unlimited, and home
> prices are a function of building cost only. You dont need to go
> back 50 or 100 years to try to guess what those costs are. Look at
> the annual report of DRHorton or Toll and you can find out precisely
> how much it costs to build every kind of house (depends on location
> a bit). Bare land values are 30-50K per lot and than cannot go neiter
> much lower not much higher. Bottom line - and those figures you cite
> confirm it, house prices go at the rate of inflation in the long
> run. Only in locations where land is no longer available without
> limit can prices become detached from building cost, and truly there
> is only Manhattan in the entire USA where there is not going to be
> an inch more of land to build.