U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-27-2010, 02:05 PM
 
1,650 posts, read 3,379,596 times
Reputation: 1121

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marv101 View Post
As long as Obama & his DOJ goons continue to push subprime loans, and even accelerate the use of them as IBD (Investors Business Daily) pointed out recently, the economy is not going to turn around, which will ensure his demise in 2012.

He and his party still think that people with lousy credit and 3.5% for a down payment are entitled to home ownership.

What a bunch of blockheads.
You would think we would have learned something by now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-27-2010, 02:06 PM
 
2,515 posts, read 1,667,990 times
Reputation: 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marv101 View Post
As long as Obama & his DOJ goons continue to push subprime loans, and even accelerate the use of them as IBD (Investors Business Daily) pointed out recently, the economy is not going to turn around, which will ensure his demise in 2012.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marv101 View Post

He and his party still think that people with lousy credit and 3.5% for a down payment are entitled to home ownership.

What a bunch of blockheads.
Ya the brains behind that mess need to be evaluated fro fitness for the job. They are trying to restart the housing bubble. We are over built. We canít run the economy on more over building. We need to rebuild our manufacturing base. Or come up with another way to make stuff of value. We need to be doing useful things as a population.

Supply and demand. There is a 5 to 7 year backlog of foreclosed houses that need to be cleared out before there will be large demand for more houses. So we will not be seeing much in the way of new construction any time soon.

I donít believe in entitlement. If you want a house then you need to work a job and pay for one. Now with the economy downsizing the way that it is, and outsourcing what it is, we need to replace the income that has moved off shore. So up the minimum wage fare enough to replace the lost income.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2010, 02:09 PM
 
2,515 posts, read 1,667,990 times
Reputation: 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluebelt1234 View Post
You would think we would have learned something by now.

Yes you would have but no one has held the politicians accountable for their actions in a long time so we get what we pay for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2010, 02:14 PM
 
69,372 posts, read 53,936,322 times
Reputation: 9358
Quote:
Originally Posted by newonecoming2 View Post
The banks are required to have cash on hand or money on deposit in the fed. This is called reserves.
yes I know.. as an individual who started the process, and then later abandoned the process when the reserve requirements were increased, I'm very well of the process..
Quote:
Originally Posted by newonecoming2 View Post
This is different than the equity that you are talking about. You can by requiring the banks to hold higher amounts of reserves have them buy the national debt at zero interest rates. The cash is the debt. Up the reserve and you have pulled money out of circulation. Not equity requirement cash in reserve.
You can not require banks to hold national debt at zero interest.. This would come at a cost which would then lower other rates of returns and increase costs on the consumers who need to borrow. Do you really think banks wouldnt have to offset the devaluing currency and at the same time not be compensated for the lack of time value of money you are expecting them to lose out on?
Quote:
Originally Posted by newonecoming2 View Post
The need to stabilize them yes and the only stable points are higher than the old peak, or less than the starting point of the bubble. The ratio of wages to income needs to be put in line for the prices to be stable, about 2.9 to 3.0 times the average wage for the average price of a house. The peak was at 4.5 times the average wage for the average price of a home. Pushing houses above the old peak and supporting those prices will make a big chunk of those toxic assets that are on the government books a whole lot less toxic. They even may be worth something.
They are very much worth something but I want to know where you got your equation from because I know people all over the spectrum. I myself hold an average over 100x my wages, and my home is relatively inexpensive. I have no problem paying my debts.. Its a mater of priorities.. For office buildings, apartments etc, you'll be lucky to get 10x, and government guaranteed ones, run about 14x the income.. 4x is not out of line at all...
Quote:
Originally Posted by newonecoming2 View Post
Tell that to the fed. Up the rate to a sane 6% for the prime and watch the deficit explode. We donít have a free market we have something else.
Completely agree.. we cant afford to increase the interest rates at this point... Its why I'm trying to buy as much as possible and take on as much debt as possible, maximizing the rate above to extend the debt out as far as possible. In this economy, I'll take on hundreds of millions in debt if I could...
Quote:
Originally Posted by newonecoming2 View Post
It will take a long time for the housing prices to fall down to where they need to be for them to be stable. Japan is 20 years into it and prices havenít gone below the starting point of their bubble. They arenít going up yet. We are going to have people messing with things. So let them mess in a way that will get things over quickly.
housing prices dont need to move at all.. They are very stable due to the rental markets.. What we need are JOBS, to move more back into the buying markets... In my opinion they have fallen far lower than they should have, but thats due to the domino effects of no jobs for so long.. And the UE benefits arent helping matters in the least..
Quote:
Originally Posted by newonecoming2 View Post
The banks are losing money or holding money at no interest rate. With inflation this is a tax on the banks. (The only one they pay)
Where do you think banks are losing money? They are making record profits
Bailed-Out Banks Raking In Big Profits - washingtonpost.com
Quote:
Originally Posted by newonecoming2 View Post
They can't move money from the tresury fast enough to run the goverment. It just doesn't work that way.
They dont need to move money from treasuries.. They are the safest investments in the nation, and if the government is loaning money so you can buy treasuries.. its free money at the taxpayers expense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2010, 02:16 PM
 
69,372 posts, read 53,936,322 times
Reputation: 9358
Quote:
Originally Posted by newonecoming2 View Post
The reason that there is no money as you said is the falling prices of houses. This needs to be adressed before we can get economic growth. The only sustanable way to get higher housing prices is with higher wages. With outsorcing to China higher wages come from raising the minimum wage.
Wrong.. the only way to get housing prices increasing is to provide jobs.. PERIOD.. Look at the areas with the highest unemployment rates.. Compare areas like Detroit, and Youngstown.. You can buy homes there for $5,000.. Now compare this to areas with lower unemployment levels.. Like Washington DC...

You cant just increase wages and think things will get fixed because it creates an offset on a business balance sheet that requires company lay off more individuals to pay for, thereby lowering the demand for housing even further..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2010, 02:19 PM
 
69,372 posts, read 53,936,322 times
Reputation: 9358
Quote:
Originally Posted by newonecoming2 View Post
So up the minimum wage fare enough to replace the lost income.
And where do you think the money will come to pay for this? Increased pricing on products, thereby draining the consumers of spendable cash.. thereby destroying the economy and causing more job losses..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2010, 02:46 PM
 
2,515 posts, read 1,667,990 times
Reputation: 362

Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
yes I know.. as an individual who started the process, and then later abandoned the process when the reserve requirements were increased, I'm very well of the process..
J

Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
You can not require banks to hold national debt at zero interest.. This would come at a cost which would then lower other rates of returns and increase costs on the consumers who need to borrow. Do you really think banks wouldnt have to offset the devaluing currency and at the same time not be compensated for the lack of time value of money you are expecting them to lose out on?
The reserves that they are required to hold are the national debt or part of it. The lack of taxes is the compensation as well as the lack of hyperinflation.


Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
They are very much worth something but I want to know where you got your equation from because I know people all over the spectrum. I myself hold an average over 100x my wages, and my home is relatively inexpensive. I have no problem paying my debts.. Its a mater of priorities.. For office buildings, apartments etc, you'll be lucky to get 10x, and government guaranteed ones, run about 14x the income.. 4x is not out of line at all...
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_estate_bubble I was saying average price. Not the end of the bell curve buyer. 3 times the average wage for the average price of a house is sustainable. More than that isnít. The probability of having hyperinflation is really good so more debt is a good investment. But donít quote me on this one as we have a macro picture that is very much looking like deflation. The feds printing press vs. the collapsing Real estate bubble. Iíll get back to you on the outcome of that one in a bit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Completely agree.. we cant afford to increase the interest rates at this point... Its why I'm trying to buy as much as possible and take on as much debt as possible, maximizing the rate above to extend the debt out as far as possible. In this economy, I'll take on hundreds of millions in debt if I could...
With the specter of hyperinflation with the worlds reserve currency in the offing you arenít making an entirely bad decision.


Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
housing prices dont need to move at all.. They are very stable due to the rental markets.. What we need are JOBS, to move more back into the buying markets... In my opinion they have fallen far lower than they should have, but thats due to the domino effects of no jobs for so long.. And the UE benefits arent helping matters in the least..
When a bubble pops the ending price is less than the starting price. Most often.


Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Where do you think banks are losing money? They are making record profits


Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
They dont need to move money from treasuries.. They are the safest investments in the nation, and if the government is loaning money so you can buy treasuries.. its free money at the taxpayers expense.
I was saying that you canít print money fast enough to run a government, with a printing press or with any other way of making up money, transferring from the treasury department to the general budget. I wasnít talking about T-bills.


Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Wrong.. the only way to get housing prices increasing is to provide jobs.. PERIOD..
I agree with you completely. The good old Phelps curve inflation drive employment. But you need cash to lubricate things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Look at the areas with the highest unemployment rates.. Compare areas like
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Detroit, and Youngstown.. You can buy homes there for $5,000.. Now compare this to areas with lower unemployment levels.. Like WashingtonDC...

You cant just increase wages and think things will get fixed because it creates an offset on a business balance sheet that requires company lay off more individuals to pay for, thereby lowering the demand for housing even further..
For the nation as a whole raising wages will make for more disposable income this will mean more ability to borrow money, and more spending. If you can lever 100X your income then doubling your income will let you lever 2X more than you had before. Iím talking about everyone that is making less than the median hourly income getting a raise promptly with the minimum wage going up. Back in 2009 I read a paper by macro mavens that said that the stock market then was priced for a $800 billion dollar turnaround in consumer spending. If you want a turn around like that then try giving the consumers $800 billion more to spend.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2010, 03:00 PM
 
19,216 posts, read 12,557,273 times
Reputation: 2337
Nobody has any reason to claim unemployment these days.

Everyone can just retrain to be a security officer with Wackenhut.

Wackenhut - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://jobs.mt.gov/jobs/seeker/sear...e&onetType=all
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2010, 03:23 PM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
18,807 posts, read 14,936,141 times
Reputation: 3872
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
In order for your argument to be accurate, everyone should quit their jobs and go on unemployment, thereby boosting the economy even more. Is this something you think is true?

Again.. its either a boost or its not.. The amount of the boost would depend by how many are given money but it doesnt automatically flip the results from a negative to a postive..
I have never stated being on unemployment is better than being employed. What I said was when unemployment is high putting more $$$ in the hands of those who are unemployed do more to boost the economy then not putting $$ into their hands.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-27-2010, 09:24 PM
 
Location: Chandler, AZ
5,798 posts, read 5,275,839 times
Reputation: 3108
Another problem regarding our clueless 'MicroManager-In-Chief' was his blatant lying to the American public regarding the existence of 'shovel-ready' jobs, wich are nonexistent due to his party's allegiance to that exorbitantly potent job-killing species known as 'environmentalists'.

When an EIR is required to build a football stadium, as is the case here in LA, you know that the inmates are running the asylum.

The amount of out-of-work engineers and construction workers who could have been put to work a decade ago rebuilding our interstae highway system, building new stretches of same (Dallas to Denver & Houston to Austin immediately come to mind) would have unquestionably resulted in avalanches of new revenue streams to both state and federal tax coffers.

Add to that the thousands of merchants of thousands of cities of all sizes from coast to coast if not for environmental roadblocks which should never have come into existence in the first place, and it makes you despise Democrats even more, and the ongoing drilling ban in the Gulf Of Mexico is also their fault as well, thanks to Obama The Job Killer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top