[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Now it's true because of this, demand will decrease, and prices will (continue to) drop. However, with the interest rate cuts, the number of foreclosures will be less than they could have been.

Except that the Fed won't be able to keep the rates that low for long. Expect to see them creep back up. And in order to stave off the rash of foreclosures 1) the rates would have to be kept at the historically low rates of the recent past and 2) you'd have to somehow magically cause the housing market to begin appreciating at 25% a year.

[Big Mac]

Who needs 25% appreciation per year? How do you arrive at that figure?

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Who needs 25% appreciation per year? How do you arrive at that figure?

In the craziest parts of the bubble market--Southern California, southern Florida, Atlanta, parts of the souwhwest--houses were appreciating as much as 25% to 30% a year. Unfortunately, many people bought houses assuming that rate of appreciation was normal. Absent constantly increasing equity there's no way they can afford the houses. For some of the most insane stories around the Irvine Housing Blog is a good start.

[Eug]

The 25% number is just picking a number out of a hat.

Even if prices continue to decrease slightly in the coming few years, that would be relatively OK. You don't need 25% appreciation to ward of a large portion of the foreclosures.

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by Eug 

The 25% number is just picking a number out of a hat.

Even if prices continue to decrease slightly in the coming few years, that would be relatively OK. You don't need 25% appreciation to ward of a large portion of the foreclosures.

It's not picking a number out of a hat. Read that blog, or read others which cover the same thing. The bubble was, quite literally, insane. However, even if you need your house to appreciate by 10% a year, you're screwed as, historically, housing prices have outpaced inflation by .7% a year. And a lot of the houses bought need double digit appreciation to stay in front of loans.

We haven't seen the worst of this thing yet. It's not just a bubble or a correction. It's serious structural damage to the financial sector.

[Eug]

Most people don't need for their houses to appreciate by anything for them remain solvent, as long as they can afford their monthly mortgage payments.

The key is not to ward off ALL foreclosures. It is to ward off SOME foreclosures.

[Lateralus]

Well, these market sell offs are certainly altering my portfolio drastically.

Several months ago, my four stocks had a fairly even slice of the pie. And now with three of them having gotten hammered (Specifically AAPL), my 4th stock, NLY is now just shy of half my portfolio value since it's been having many good days riding the rate cuts and getting buy upgrades.

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Most people don't need for their houses to appreciate by anything for them remain solvent, as long as they can afford their monthly mortgage payments.

The key is not to ward off ALL foreclosures. It is to ward off SOME foreclosures.

The issue here is that trillions (yes, trillions with a T) of dollars of questionable mortgages are out there. You only need a small percentage of those to fail to cause a cascading failure among financial institutions, which is what's happening. The monoline insurers are already in trouble, and they are the last bulwark.

[Eug]

Sounds like more sky-is-falling arguments.

There's no getting around the fact that this is a very serious issue for the US, and one that will likely get worse. However, the sky-is-falling attitude by some doesn't really have its basis in hard fact. It's just additional speculation... this time in the negative. Remember, the vast majority of mortgages are not sub-prime, and most sub-prime mortgages are not going to default any time soon either. The interest rate cuts will go along way to help out a large chunk of the sub-prime (and prime) market. However, those interest rate cuts were never intended to solve all of the US's ills.

[V12]

great time to sit back, relax, and pull the trigger on market benchmarks when they hit that too good to be true price, even though we're panicing it doesn't mean you should invest with the fundamentals.

[Tesselator]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Sounds like more sky-is-falling arguments.

So what would you call a dollar that's now worth about two cents. From just the time
that the fed has been pulling this shit? That means that someone who had $10,000
saved up for a rainy day now essentially has $200.

Would you rather we say the sky is lowering?

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Sounds like more sky-is-falling arguments.

There's no getting around the fact that this is a very serious issue for the US, and one that will likely get worse. However, the sky-is-falling attitude by some doesn't really have its basis in hard fact. It's just additional speculation... this time in the negative. Remember, the vast majority of mortgages are not sub-prime, and most sub-prime mortgages are not going to default any time soon either. The interest rate cuts will go along way to help out a large chunk of the sub-prime (and prime) market. However, those interest rate cuts were never intended to solve all of the US's ills.

1) Calling this a "sub-prime" mortgage problem is a misnomer: the problem long ago spread to other mortgage types. Sub-prime mortgages were simply the first to show up on the radar;2) You don't need most mortgages to default. You only need enough defaults to begin to drag down the entire system, which has already happened;
3) The rate of defaults is increasing;
4) The interest rate cut won't do much at all, as the real issue here is much lower home prices, which means a lack of appreciation and the inability of those in trouble to sell and pay off the mortgage. Couple this to negative amortization loans and things get doubly bad. In some parts of Southern California home price are already down 20% and going lower.

There's also a bit of intellectual dishonesty calling this a 'sky is falling' scenario, as that implies situations other than 'the sky is falling' are okay. This is far, far, far from the truth.

Dow down 370 today. . .

[Eug]

4) The interest rate cut won't do much at all, as the real issue here is much lower home prices, which means a lack of appreciation and the inability of those in trouble to sell and pay off the mortgage.

Well... Lower home prices aren't the real issue for the majority of the mortgaging public.

Yes, it's true that the increased foreclosures and dropping prices are indeed a big drag on the system... but it is what it is, a drag on the system, and not the bottom falling out of the US economy. If the US is to see a recession, I suspect it will be relatively short, at least to compared to some past periods.

There's also a bit of intellectual dishonesty calling this a 'sky is falling' scenario, as that implies situations other than 'the sky is falling' are okay.

What I'm implying is what what I said... which is that the effects are negative, and will continue to be so, but probably won't be as bad (in most areas) as some are trying to make them out to be.

Most of us expected this to come at some point. In fact, I had a thread here from 2006 talking about this. However, despite the fact I expected this to come, I don't expect 40% price drops in most areas, although I wouldn't be surprised to see it in some.

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by Tesselator 

So what would you call a dollar that's now worth about two cents?

Where are you getting this math?

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Yes, it's true that the increased foreclosures and dropping prices are indeed a big drag on the system... but it is what it is, a drag on the system, and not the bottom falling out of the US economy. If the US is to see a recession, I suspect it will be relatively short, at least to compared to some past periods.

I'm betting it will be as bad as the 1981-1982 one, or worse. But I guess we will just wait and see what happens.

[Tesselator]

Stage6 -Liberty- Mises in 1919.avi - Video and Download See Me.

Mises Audio/Video Imperialism: Enemy of Freedom Hear Me.

Apple


DOW

[Tesselator]

Originally Posted by Don Pickett 

Where are you getting this math?

The M3 and because that's now been made secret the MZM.

Also I've heard 20 or 30 economists say this same thing. Most of them want to be more
conservative with the figures and say "about four cents" but the best estimates I've seen
and can figure on my own bring to more like two cents.

[Don Pickett]

burp

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by Tesselator 

The M3 and because that's now been made secret the MZM.

Also I've heard 20 or 30 economists say this same thing. Most of them want to be more
conservative with the figures and say "about four cents" but the best estimates I've seen
and can figure on my own bring to more like two cents.

That's not enough. Explain how you are arriving at this number. You say 'worth two cents.' Compared to what?

[Uncle Skeleton]

Don't be a sheeple dude, just believe him. Youtube is on his side, he must be right.

[Tesselator]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Don't be a sheeple dude, just believe him. Youtube is on his side, he must be right.

LOL

Compared to when we started the Fed. I said that already, or thought I had.

We entered the era of fractional reserves for the third time after great heros
killed the first two for the same reasons this one has proved itself evil.

[hyteckit]

Hmm... my $125 buy price for AAPL got triggered. It's below $125 now for apple stocks.

[Nodnarb]

Wow. I got in at ~$135. I know it's not a loss till you sell it, but wow it's gone down a town yesterday/today. I'm not too worried, I know it'll be back up in a year or two+ (which is when I plan on selling it), it just hurts seeing your money fall and fall.

[Nodnarb]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

Hmm... my $125 buy price for AAPL got triggered. It's below $125 now for apple stocks.

By the way, great buy... I got antsy last week and got in at $135 cause it was slowly going up and I didn't want it going to $140+ and miss the boat. Props to you for waiting it out, I think you got in at a good price.

I think in a few years, we will have both made a nice amount off the stock... only time will tell!

[Nodnarb]

What the heck happened today? It went down to $122 in regular trading, and now is already down to $119 in after hours. There was no significant news that I know of... that ~7% drop is way above the rest of the market. Strange.


The damn iPhone and widgets on my computer are killing me... Maybe once a day I would check the stock if I had to search for it in google or something, but to just press "stocks" on my phone is turning me into a compulsive nut!

[hyteckit]

The sell off was suppose to be the last 2 weeks, but due to 2 rate cuts, there was actual gain in the stock market. However, recession looks like it's upon us and there is no more rate cuts anytime soon, so people are selling their shares in anticipation that it'll go down even further.

[V12]

theres a rate cut coming at the end of the month, at least 25 basis points.

And we're not actually in a recession, just in the cycle that leads to recession, after this cycle well be back up and running again(hopefully), historically, the market actually does better when we're in a actual resession (2 consec. qtrs of lower GDPs) in comparision to the current cycle we're in. And don't forget right now the 'panic' thats influencing the market, shorters are making the money right now, long term investors have a great opportunity to get in (think Warren Buffet style investing)...Buffet himself said the credit companies are so low that they're looking appitizing to buy if youre in it for the long haul (AXP for one....) as the oracle of omaha says: "be greedy when others are fearful, and fearful when others are greedy"

-please forgive me the grammer/spelling in advance, i had to get my fix for the night and im half asleep, ill edit tomorrow afternoon-

[Tesselator]

Originally Posted by hyteckit 

...people are selling their shares in anticipation that it'll go down even further.

That keeps going through my mind too. But would the $INDU follow that too? AAPL and the dow are
following each other very very closely.

I'm wondering if I shouldn't set my trigger to $25 or something...

[hyteckit]

Honestly, I think I should stay out of the stock market in the next 3-4 months. I'm going to take the wait and see approach.

Retail sales are down, customer confident is down. Credit crunch, tax season. Stimulus plan and budget in a limbo. There seems to be a lot of uncertainty and lack of confidence in the economy.

[Tesselator]

This 6-part series is kinda interesting:

YouTube - 2/5/2008- Part 1 On FOX

[Don Pickett]

Senior global policymakers have raised projections for the size of subprime-related credit losses in a move that implies financial institutions will have to increase write-offs.

Speaking after the meeting of Group of Seven finance leaders, Peer Steinbrück, German finance minister, said the G7 now feared that write-offs of losses on securities linked to US subprime mortgages could reach $400bn.

This is sharply higher than the $120bn credit losses that Wall Street banks and other institutions have revealed in recent weeks – and also far bigger than the US Federal Reserve’s estimates for subprime losses last year of $100bn-$150bn.

We're not going to know the true cost of this thing for a while, but it's going to be much higher than early estimates.

FT.com / World - Subprime losses could rise to $400bn

[Tesselator]

Yep.
Hehehe you didn't really expect them to tell it to us straight did you?

These are pretty good:
YouTube - RP & Ben Bernanke I love the crossed fingers quote.
YouTube - RP & Ben Bernanke

YouTube - The Federal Reserve get oWnEd

When there is a deliberate debasement of a currency, it is predictable that the middle
class is injured, the poor are hurt, and there's a transfer of wealth to the wealthy.
Until we understand that, I do not believe we can solve this problem. And if we
resort to continued monetary inflation and more government programs, we will
only make the inequality worse.

I noticed that when Bernanke said: "Well, first, our national saving includes corporate
savings as well as household savings. You put those together, and you get a positive
number, so there is some net saving going on in the United States." what was really
being said there is that the wealth was being transfered from the poor and middle
classes to the rich and if we were to count that - then it's a positive growth. How
smarmy is this guy anyway?!?!

Inflation is a monetary phenomenon. It comes from the Federal Reserve system.
The Federal Reserve has tremendous pressure put on them because almost
everybody wants low interest rates. But, of course, that contributes to the lack
of savings, which is another problem that we have in this country.

We concentrate on inflation by implying -- and everybody casually accepts
that inflation is a price problem. But the prices that go up is one of the
consequences of inflation. Inflation causes a malinvestment. It causes
excessive debt. And it causes financial bubbles that we have to deal with.

I guess we're going to see more and more of them emerging on the financial
landscape with the next one that I can see anyway, being the credit and loan
bubble. That one, when it pops, will tear huge chunks out of what we consider
the middle and lower middle classes. Imagine you and almost everyone you
know, lost your credit cards in the next month. :o It may not happen in the
next month but it's moving in that direction. We'll know much more about all
that in the months to come. Meanwhile $400bn is only the second number
they're giving us. There might well be a 3rd. and 4th. The credit bubble is
in the trillions I think isn't it? I heard 3 trillion but I might be spacing that off.

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by Tesselator 

When there is a deliberate debasement of a currency, it is predictable that the middle class is injured, the poor are hurt, and there's a transfer of wealth to the wealthy. Until we understand that, I do not believe we can solve this problem.

Except, of course, that history does not bear this theory out. The thirty odd years between the end of WWII and the resurgence of the modern conservative movement, with its relentless drive towards deregulation, union-breaking and privatization saw the greatest economic growth, the greatest income equality and the greatest economic expansion in our history, all with a "debased" currency. The difference between that time and now lies largely in the steady lessening of government regulation over industry and the steady breaking of the American union movement, both of which have allowed corporations to push down wage rates and retain more income.

I know you feel strongly about your views, but you are reducing a massively multivariate problem into a univariate one. American economic history during the time of the gold standard was no better, and in many ways much worse, than the history since then.

[Tesselator]

Originally Posted by Don Pickett 

I know you feel strongly about your views, but you are reducing a massively multivariate problem into a univariate one. American economic history during the time of the gold standard was no better, and in many ways much worse, than the history since then.

No, I don't believe I am. You are correct about corporatism and favoritism over the past 40 or 50 years and it's affect on this situation. I wasn't attempting to speak exclusively - or as you put it, in "univariate" terms. However, corporate interests will always seek to lobby special interests in an inflationary system. Hoping that there will be those who sustain restraint waving away piles of money and power, in order to regulate fairness is and has proven itself, folly. Regulation invites corruption in every instance I can think of. That step needs to be cut out of the process all together. The rule of law in a constitutional framework together with free markets has been proven able and above the fray of our current system.

Anyway, we're not at much disagreement in our opinions - just a slight tilting toward one or more of the root causes. Really, we can boil it down to a when rather than a why.

[Don Pickett]

Originally Posted by Tesselator 

However, corporate interests will always seek to lobby special interests in an inflationary system.

Corporate interests will always lobby politicians, period. Read up in the economic history of the U.S. from the end of the Civil War through World War I. The lobbying was even more naked and breathtakingly illegal than today, and all with specie currency.

Regulation invites corruption in every instance I can think of.

This makes no sense at all.

The rule of law in a constitutional framework together with free markets has been proven able and above the fray of our current system.

In the entire economic history of the U.S. you will not find this to be true.

[CharlesS]

[Tesselator]

Originally Posted by Don Pickett 

Corporate interests will always lobby politicians, period.

Very untrue. And you're making a rather embarrassing historical mistake there. But without
getting into all that just ask yourself why would they lobby if there was nothing to gain? I
guess there could be moral interests.

This makes no sense at all.

Surely you're smart enough to see that if an official or agency has the power to regulate then
it is in the supreme interest of certain factions corporate or other, to corrupt or infiltrate in
order there be special privileges granted??? Dude, you'd suck as politician!

In the entire economic history of the U.S. you will not find this to be true.

Actually it was true for the majority of the 1800's. It's when those precepts were compromised
or altered (during that time and after) that we found ourselves getting into trouble. Assuming
you're talking about the same U.S. that I am there is no other conclusion one who has educated
themselves in these matters can reach without unsound or incomplete reasoning.

[Eug]

For some reason AAPL is back up over $129 today. Very volatile, this stock.

[Tesselator]

Yeah.. It dropped down from $200 a month or so ago in a really steep dive
to about $130 and for the last 3 weeks or so it's been in flux between $120
and $135. Up and down... up and down.



But that kinda follows tech. AAPL is a bit lower than the average but I wouldn't
say much more volatile (for these days I mean):


AAPL in Blue

[villalobos]

APL is at $119. Anybody buying? Some here trying to average down from the previous "steals"?

[SirCastor]

I might buy more at $100. $119 is $20 cheaper than my first shot, but it'll all go back up. It always does.

[torsoboy]

Originally Posted by villalobos 

APL is at $119. Anybody buying? Some here trying to average down from the previous "steals"?

come on next macworld! (pray for a better keynote/announcement)

[Tesselator]

Hehehe I can't believe you guys think this is going to go back up.
I dunno yall might be right but then why are so many of the top
analysts and consultants saying to get out of the market, buy a
farm, and stock food and arms?

[Powerbook]

Okay I put € 5000 back into AAPL ! I don't like to wait any longer (sold mine back at $ 147)...
And I put another € 2500 in a high risk Turbo CALL. [ DR6YJH ], that fell from € 6 to 22 €Ct...

Let the Adrenaline rush begin...


Regards,
PB

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Tesselator 

Hehehe I can't believe you guys think this is going to go back up.

Of course it will. To think otherwise is silly.

[Tesselator]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Of course it will. To think otherwise is silly.

I sure hope you're right!

It jumped up by $15 today. But I hear they devalued the dollar in order to get
bigger numbers while the actual value remains the same. I wonder if that $15
jump was that or something else? Wouldn't that be cool if it went up to like $230
and everyone got their money back?

Gold hit $972 today and many analysts are saying that within the next 8 months
it will hit over $2,000 an oz.. Some say "over $2k" and others predict as high as
$4,000 and more. But the 5 or 6 sources I listen to regularly all agree on the
"over $2K".

I went down to the gold bullion shop when it was $600 cause the same people
were saying it would hit the $1,000 mark in "the first few months of 2008" but
the shop wanted a $20 "fee" per $60 coin so I flipped them the bird and took
my $20K back home. I wished I hadn't now... I'd be $150 an oz. up
after all was figured in. There was a $100,000 bar that had no fee added but
ummm..

[Shaddim]

I like gold, I have quite a few coins of different types (I'm not a collector, just bought some along the way), but platinum looks to be the best precious metal investment right now.

Mar. `07: $1,190 /oz
Today: $2,141 /oz

[Powerbook]

Originally Posted by Tesselator 

I sure hope you're right!

It jumped up by $15 today. But I hear they devalued the dollar in order to get
bigger numbers while the actual value remains the same. I wonder if that $15
jump was that or something else? Wouldn't that be cool if it went up to like $230
and everyone got their money back?

Looks good. Reuters:

--
Apple on track to sell 10 million iPhones in 2008-COO
Wed Feb 27, 2008 6:07pm EST

Apple shares rise on optimism over iPhone demand
10:12am EST
Apple affirms iPhone target
27 Feb 2008
Apple to talk iPhone software plans on March 6
27 Feb 2008

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Apple Inc Chief Operating Officer Tim Cook reiterated to investors on Wednesday that the company was on track to hit its sales goal of 10 million iPhones this year.
Cook told a Goldman Sachs conference monitored by Webcast that the company had "really good confidence" that Apple would meet that target in calendar 2008.
Apple shares rose 3.9 percent in extended trade to $127.73 after closing at $122.96 on Nasdaq, up 3.2 percent.

[torsoboy]

Originally Posted by Tesselator 

I went down to the gold bullion shop when it was $600 cause the same people
were saying it would hit the $1,000 mark in "the first few months of 2008" butthe shop wanted a $20 "fee" per $60 coin so I flipped them the bird and took my $20K back home. I wished I hadn't now... I'd be $150 an oz. up after all was figured in. There was a $100,000 bar that had no fee added but ummm..

So if they didn't charge you a fee for each coin/bar/whatever, how would they make any money selling at the same price that they would have to pay to buy it themselves? Seems like there has to be some sort of markup (though $20 on $60 seems a bit steep).

[Tesselator]

Yeah, I agree. That was the only problem for me with it - it was too steep. I was
expecting a marked up exchange rate like they do with different denominations.

--
Powerbook,

Be a little careful with Reuters. They often paint the information in the best light
possible to make whatever point they're going for. Like mixing 2 and 3 day old
data in order to suggest something that otherwise might not be correct or true
etc.. I don't mean to discredit everything they say but you gotta watch'em.