[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by RCCCB

The way this one works under the Obama administration is you can have a home on the books that was a 300k value now worth 100k written as 350k as long as you don't sell it. Banks don't have their balanced based on actual values, and they can't sell anything without taking a loss...

FASB rules are pretty far removed from any presidential administration. For example, had Sen. McCain become president, FASB would have done pretty much the same thing.

[RCCCB]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

FASB rules are pretty far removed from any presidential administration. For example, had Sen. McCain become president, FASB would have done pretty much the same thing.

We kind of saw enough of it with firms like Arthur Anderson when they were cooking books during the Clinton administration and prosecuted under Bush.

You can take desperate measures in desperate times so far IMO.

I hate McCain, but I doubt he would have done the same thing fiscally as Obama. Lord knows he wouldn't create so called shovel ready jobs with trillions of our money that in the end went 95% for government union work.

We'll see, but the more government fiddles with finance laws and real estate, the harder it will be to have anything bounce back IMO.

[olecapt]

Originally Posted by RCCCB

We kind of saw enough of it with firms like Arthur Anderson when they were cooking books during the Clinton administration and prosecuted under Bush.

You can take desperate measures in desperate times so far IMO.

I hate McCain, but I doubt he would have done the same thing fiscally as Obama. Lord knows he wouldn't create so called shovel ready jobs with trillions of our money that in the end went 95% for government union work.

We'll see, but the more government fiddles with finance laws and real estate, the harder it will be to have anything bounce back IMO.

Amazing. Krugman is all over Obama for not spending trillions of our dollars on infrastructure projects. And here we find out Krugman is wrong and Obama did spend the trillions...Amazing.

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by olecapt

Amazing. Krugman is all over Obama for not spending trillions of our dollars on infrastructure projects. And here we find out Krugman is wrong and Obama did spend the trillions...Amazing.

I keep wondering where all the stimulus money went. I've read that only about 10% or so ended up in infrastructure projects.

But then again if Eugene Fama is right, the stimulus didn't matter anyway.

Bailouts and Stimulus Plans - Fama/French Forum

[olecapt]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

I keep wondering where all the stimulus money went. I've read that only about 10% or so ended up in infrastructure projects.

But then again if Eugene Fama is right, the stimulus didn't matter anyway.

Bailouts and Stimulus Plans - Fama/French Forum

The Fed just printed up a new 650 billion and bought government securities with it. Did the Fed finance its 650? I don't think so. So it appears the fed has provided the government with 650billion without any offsetting loss of other activity.

Now of course this is inflationary...basically the fed just increased the dollars in the world by 650 billion. But does it, in an economy which is pretty deflationary do any harm?

I would think Krugman would argue print a couple of trillion more and pour it into highways and infrastructure. When the inflation rate gets to four or five percent do something else. But hopefully by then the economy is expanding quickly.

[las vegas drunk]

Krugman is a total and complete moron who actually believes in is what is called keynesian economics. Peter Schiff tells all in his last interview. The economy is going to go into hyperinflation because of the fed. They could only delay it for so long.

Peter Schiff: Bernanke is Going to Destroy the Country

[ladysovereign]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

Bailouts and Stimulus Plans - Fama/French Forum

"Unfortunately, bailouts and stimulus plans are not a cure. The problem is simple: bailouts and stimulus plans are funded by issuing more government debt. (The money must come from somewhere!)"

Good link and I think an overhaul of the Economists giving our Government advice is greatly needed.

[olecapt]

Volume is 2559 for SFR and 708 for condos. That is down on the SFRs about 1000 yoy and 250 month over month Condos are down 150 yoy and up slightly month over month..

SFR pricing is a median of $133K and an average of 159.9K. That is down 2K mom and 6.1K yoy. Condos are at $60K down 10K yoy and $1K mom.

Hate to say it but we clearly are seeing a new reduction. This is not bouncing along the bottom...this appears a reasonably strong down trend.

I want to look at the inventory but don't have time tonight.

[sdreloc]

Whatever it takes to turn over and get rid of all these foreclosures and short sale homes. Until they stop being a major part of or the majority of home inventory, it seems likely pricing will not rise.

[tony soprano]

Originally Posted by olecapt

Volume is 2559 for SFR and 708 for condos. That is down on the SFRs about 1000 yoy and 250 month over month Condos are down 150 yoy and up slightly month over month..

SFR pricing is a median of $133K and an average of 159.9K. That is down 2K mom and 6.1K yoy. Condos are at $60K down 10K yoy and $1K mom.

Hate to say it but we clearly are seeing a new reduction. This is not bouncing along the bottom...this appears a reasonably strong down trend.

I want to look at the inventory but don't have time tonight.

Well, look at the bright side - this will give you another opportunity to call the bottom yet again, make redundant proclamations that "something's got to give", and to let everyone know that it's going to be interesting. Every cloud has its silver lining.

Will you be creating a new thread for your next bottom call or will you just amend your last one?