Strength Returning

  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    Nov 20, 2010 4:26 PM GMT
    Since July 2008 when the SAFE Act was passed there has been much cleanup in thr world of mortgages. The GSEs are no longer stupidly throwing money to home buyers who cannot service the debt to as great of a degree, some states are requiring mortgage brokers to be licensed under the SAFE Act terms -- plus added requirements, and small banks are moving in by opening their own mortgage operations using stringent requirements to let to borrowers. Add to this, new requirements for aggregators on the securitization side and investing in instruments related to mortgages has improved.

    The one remaining trouble spot of course are the GSEs. This will improve dramatically if we conservatives hold sway to any degree in the next two years (and we will because budgets originate in the House of Representatives and the not weakly Democratic controlled Senate), then wipe the slate clean a la Illinois in the executive and legislative branches.

    So.....what does this mean?

    You hard working gay men with income and good credit will once again be able to purchase a home at your income level. If you invest, banking continues to strengthen thus producing higher dividend yields for your 401k should you decide to invest in banks. Strengthening will occur across sectors other than manufacturing (I predict GM will be back down the tubes as soon as recently established labor accords go by the wayside) bringing increased employment and pay to some.

    As always, solid provable skills mean you are likely to fair better in this global economy. Folks with soft skillsets will lag until money is generated on the high income end and provided taxes remain low. (Guess what happens to the gay interior decorator when I cannot buy that Manhattan condo due to Uncle Sam's un-satiated desire to take my dollars.)

    So, times are better for me, at least for my non-U.S. operations, with a few bumps here and there. I'll hold out on aiding good old America until we see what happens in the next 2.5 years. As my favorite saying goes, "one-hundred percent of zero is still zero."

    Dream on Looters.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 20, 2010 5:03 PM GMT
    Ditto icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 20, 2010 6:46 PM GMT
    Wow...any more arrogance in the OP and I'd swear snidebitch had multiple accounts here.
  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    Nov 20, 2010 8:10 PM GMT
    I love it, I love it, I love it.

    Three replies and not the first appears when I load this forum. That means you guys are on my block list.

    Go grovel elsewhere guys.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 20, 2010 8:52 PM GMT
    conservativejock saidI love it, I love it, I love it.

    Three replies and not the first appears when I load this forum. That means you guys are on my block list.

    Go grovel elsewhere guys.



    Are you SURE you're not SB?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 20, 2010 9:01 PM GMT
    OtterJoq said
    conservativejock saidI love it, I love it, I love it.

    Three replies and not the first appears when I load this forum. That means you guys are on my block list.

    Go grovel elsewhere guys.



    Are you SURE you're not SB?


    I love how he assumes people are "groveling", when we're really snoring at his venial attempts to promote his sociopathic worldview. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 20, 2010 9:19 PM GMT
    It's telling that the US world of mortgages required cleaning up in the first place. What happened to the, er, regulations? *being facetious, no need to answer*

    -Doug

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 20, 2010 11:38 PM GMT
    This thread gives a pretty good indicator about what is wrong with many RJ political threads. Except for the message immediately above this one, all responses were negative without presenting anything related to the original message or anything substantive at all. One of the messages describing the world view of the OP was ludicrous, with no basis in fact. Clearly an example of the shallowness all too often seen here.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 20, 2010 11:42 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidThis thread gives a pretty good indicator about what is wrong with many RJ political threads. Except for the message immediately above this one, all responses were negative without presenting anything related to the original message or anything substantive at all. One of the messages describing the world view of the OP was ludicrous, with no basis in fact. Clearly an example of the shallowness all too often seen here.


    It ends with a personal attack on everyone who doesn't share the OP's worldview.

    We gave him exactly what he deserved.

    In fact, I'd say we were generous.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 20, 2010 11:53 PM GMT
    OtterJoq said
    socalfitness saidThis thread gives a pretty good indicator about what is wrong with many RJ political threads. Except for the message immediately above this one, all responses were negative without presenting anything related to the original message or anything substantive at all. One of the messages describing the world view of the OP was ludicrous, with no basis in fact. Clearly an example of the shallowness all too often seen here.


    It ends with a personal attack on everyone who doesn't share the OP's worldview.

    We gave him exactly what he deserved.

    In fact, I'd say we were generous.



    Ugh. This is why I have Socal blocked. Now I have to respond.

    ConversativeJack said:

    "So, times are better for me, at least for my non-U.S. operations, with a few bumps here and there. I'll hold out on aiding good old America until we see what happens in the next 2.5 years. As my favorite saying goes, "one-hundred percent of zero is still zero."

    The features of sociopathy are in part:

    Glibness

    Failure to recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used

    Grandiose Sense of Self, e.g. Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."

    A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities.

    Callousness/Lack of Empathy


    I think I'm being generous.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 21, 2010 12:13 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    OtterJoq said
    socalfitness saidThis thread gives a pretty good indicator about what is wrong with many RJ political threads. Except for the message immediately above this one, all responses were negative without presenting anything related to the original message or anything substantive at all. One of the messages describing the world view of the OP was ludicrous, with no basis in fact. Clearly an example of the shallowness all too often seen here.


    It ends with a personal attack on everyone who doesn't share the OP's worldview.

    We gave him exactly what he deserved.

    In fact, I'd say we were generous.



    Ugh. This is why I have Socal blocked. Now I have to respond.

    ConversativeJack said:

    "So, times are better for me, at least for my non-U.S. operations, with a few bumps here and there. I'll hold out on aiding good old America until we see what happens in the next 2.5 years. As my favorite saying goes, "one-hundred percent of zero is still zero."

    The features of sociopathy are in part:

    Glibness

    Failure to recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used

    Grandiose Sense of Self, e.g. Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."

    A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities.

    Callousness/Lack of Empathy


    I think I'm being generous.

    Full of assumptions not backed up. The OP does not give any basis for such conclusions. A total stretch, and totally shallow. If anyone with the most basic intelligence looked up definitions of "sociopath" and tried to correlate with the OP, they would fail. Not surprising from someone who pulls words out of his ass and then tries to make a pathetic attempt to justify. Continual pattern of shallow intellect trying to cover up with flowery, affected language. FAIL
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 21, 2010 12:54 AM GMT
    Alright, I will play.
    conservativejock said
    You hard working gay men with income and good credit will once again be able to purchase a home at your income level. If you invest, banking continues to strengthen thus producing higher dividend yields for your 401k should you decide to invest in banks. Strengthening will occur across sectors other than manufacturing (I predict GM will be back down the tubes as soon as recently established labor accords go by the wayside) bringing increased employment and pay to some.


    As things stand, banks are not lending (even to those who have a good, verifiable income and a good credit score.) They keep moving the bar. They are investing their reserves in federal notes and deposits to guarantee themselves a return while avoiding risk. In your dream world, banks are strong and the assets that they claim exist at the values that they are claiming.

    Home prices in many areas have further to fall before they would be considered a good investment, and there are still record numbers of defaults. In addition, there is a huge "shadow inventory" of houses that the banks own and do not have on the market yet. The idea that "hard working gay men" should be dreaming of house ownership in those overpriced locations is to insult them.

    conservativejock said
    As always, solid provable skills mean you are likely to fair better in this global economy. Folks with soft skillsets will lag until money is generated on the high income end and provided taxes remain low. (Guess what happens to the gay interior decorator when I cannot buy that Manhattan condo due to Uncle Sam's un-satiated desire to take my dollars.)

    I will tell you what will happen... he will decorate that same Manhattan condo for whoever it is that buys it. Quite simply put, if that condo is on the market to sell they will lower the price as required to get it sold. Somebody will buy it and will spend the money to decorate it to their liking.

    The person who buys this condo will sell their beach house to you (because you can no longer afford that condo, I predict that you will buy a beach house) and you will hire in interior designer to have the space reflect your personality. When you sell your present house to move to the beach somebody will buy it... and on and on.

    So far, it seems like there is more economic benefit to tax you until you can not afford that condo.

    A final thought for you. If a couple of percentage points of a tax increase would price you out of that Manhattan condo I would recomend that you not purchase it anyhow. Earlier on you (almost condoscendlingly) state that the hard working gay men will be able to afford a home... at their income level. You need to consider that the Manhattan condo may not be a home that you can afford at your income level if you are that worried about a little tax increase... perhaps consider that beach house and let the rich man who can afford it buy that condo so that you don't have to default if your income falls a small amount or you get taxed at what society deems a "fair" level.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 21, 2010 5:02 AM GMT
    OtterJoq said
    socalfitness saidThis thread gives a pretty good indicator about what is wrong with many RJ political threads. Except for the message immediately above this one, all responses were negative without presenting anything related to the original message or anything substantive at all. One of the messages describing the world view of the OP was ludicrous, with no basis in fact. Clearly an example of the shallowness all too often seen here.


    It ends with a personal attack on everyone who doesn't share the OP's worldview.

    We gave him exactly what he deserved.

    In fact, I'd say we were generous.



    The OP may be like many and not give a damn what you think.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 21, 2010 7:18 AM GMT
    ElysianReport said
    OtterJoq said
    socalfitness saidThis thread gives a pretty good indicator about what is wrong with many RJ political threads. Except for the message immediately above this one, all responses were negative without presenting anything related to the original message or anything substantive at all. One of the messages describing the world view of the OP was ludicrous, with no basis in fact. Clearly an example of the shallowness all too often seen here.


    It ends with a personal attack on everyone who doesn't share the OP's worldview.

    We gave him exactly what he deserved.

    In fact, I'd say we were generous.



    The OP may be like many and not give a damn what you think.


    So be it.

    Your point, Kiwiboy?

    P.S.: Your "Hot List" includes one and only one RJ'er...and it's SnideBitch! Damn, that's funny!
  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    Nov 23, 2010 2:30 AM GMT
    west77, I have added inline comments in red.


    west77 saidAlright, I will play.
    conservativejock said
    You hard working gay men with income and good credit will once again be able to purchase a home at your income level. If you invest, banking continues to strengthen thus producing higher dividend yields for your 401k should you decide to invest in banks. Strengthening will occur across sectors other than manufacturing (I predict GM will be back down the tubes as soon as recently established labor accords go by the wayside) bringing increased employment and pay to some.


    As things stand, banks are not lending (even to those who have a good, verifiable income and a good credit score.) They keep moving the bar. They are investing their reserves in federal notes and deposits to guarantee themselves a return while avoiding risk. In your dream world, banks are strong and the assets that they claim exist at the values that they are claiming.

    Of course I do not speak for all banks. Not all banks are publicly owned nor are the world's largest and most profitable banks within U.S. borders. What I have is true. I think you are perhaps seeing this from the perspective of retail banking.

    Home prices in many areas have further to fall before they would be considered a good investment, and there are still record numbers of defaults. In addition, there is a huge "shadow inventory" of houses that the banks own and do not have on the market yet. The idea that "hard working gay men" should be dreaming of house ownership in those overpriced locations is to insult them.

    Here too, recall my comment that many small banks are entering the mortgage market. They are in fact. True, they cater to a different crowd than perhaps what you wish, but they will survive.

    conservativejock said
    As always, solid provable skills mean you are likely to fair better in this global economy. Folks with soft skillsets will lag until money is generated on the high income end and provided taxes remain low. (Guess what happens to the gay interior decorator when I cannot buy that Manhattan condo due to Uncle Sam's un-satiated desire to take my dollars.)


    I will tell you what will happen... he will decorate that same Manhattan condo for whoever it is that buys it. Quite simply put, if that condo is on the market to sell they will lower the price as required to get it sold. Somebody will buy it and will spend the money to decorate it to their liking.

    Really? Perhaps you should call the Sotheby's office at 212-606-7000. See if they will be kind enough to enlighten you and what costs owners are foregoing. Or better yet, place a bid on a unit at 15 Central Park West and see what price you can negotiate.

    The person who buys this condo will sell their beach house to you (because you can no longer afford that condo, I predict that you will buy a beach house) and you will hire in interior designer to have the space reflect your personality. When you sell your present house to move to the beach somebody will buy it... and on and on.

    Really. A prognosticator of the future. If you only knew.

    So far, it seems like there is more economic benefit to tax you until you can not afford that condo.

    You as a person are not going to tax me. :-) Nor do you know of my income or from where it flows.

    But I will suggest something. Reply to this post and make a list of all the ways you spend money on a yearly basis and I will tell who is paying whom.



    A final thought for you. If a couple of percentage points of a tax increase would price you out of that Manhattan condo I would recomend that you not purchase it anyhow. Earlier on you (almost condoscendlingly) state that the hard working gay men will be able to afford a home... at their income level. You need to consider that the Manhattan condo may not be a home that you can afford at your income level if you are that worried about a little tax increase... perhaps consider that beach house and let the rich man who can afford it buy that condo so that you don't have to default if your income falls a small amount or you get taxed at what society deems a "fair" level.

    That's what makes it fun. The challenge of taking off the table of a bloated government I'd rather bring down in size.

    Perhaps a chat out of the forums might be in order. I would think a little more honesty in what you really think might perhaps make you feel better. E-mail me on RJ if you wish.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 7:47 PM GMT
    I will try to PM you later, but there really is nothing that I will say off the board that I will not say on them. I have no problem admitting that I feel that we are ALL overtaxed, that government does not, in most cases provide good value for what is contributed. I have no problem saying that I do not believe that the rich need to transfer huge amounts of money to the poor. However, somebody needs to pay for government services and it is fair to say that somebody like Blankfein pulling in (2007 numbers) 70 million a year should pay a larger percentage than somebody in Watts pulling in $7000.

    340 failed banks so far this year... I know that there are some still lending, but many are just trying to survive. It just came out that the top 6 US banks are facing a 100 - 150 billion shortfall under BASEL III coming into effect soon. Yeah, they will just sell more shares or find a way to fix it, I am not saying that there is anything to worry about. However, it is an example of the health of banks in the U.S right now when the largest are not able to withstand the change in accounting that they all knew for years was coming.

    I know that people are not accepting low prices and are forgoing selling their high end properties. However, people in every walk of life are doing the same. The solution is not to be certain that the rich have enough money to buy high end houses (nor to give the poor money to buy houses.) The solution is to wait for the market to correct itself. I do not need to know what the person who owns 15 central park west thinks their condo is worth. I can tell you that if it is not selling, the seller is overvaluing it. (especially at an auction- the true medium to determine an assets value at any given place and point in time.)

    If I am selling a house in L.A and I demand $300 000 and the market will pay $200 000 it does not mean that my house is worth $300 000. The same thing applies to high end properties. Eventually the market will finish it's correction.

    Finally, I don't really need to make a list of how I spend money each year. Unless you are selling a Hammond B3 organ or own Richie brothers auction (where I will be paying commission to sell 3 pieces of equipment soon) I doubt that I am paying you directly. If it is stocks or resources that you own, I will consider that I am purchasing my resources (Alberta based companies) before any from the U.S...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 8:48 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidThis thread gives a pretty good indicator about what is wrong with many RJ political threads. Except for the message immediately above this one, all responses were negative without presenting anything related to the original message or anything substantive at all. One of the messages describing the world view of the OP was ludicrous, with no basis in fact. Clearly an example of the shallowness all too often seen here.


    Nope, quite wrong. Likely these guys remember twomack's history on RJ.

    I certainly do, and so do you Socal.

    -Doug
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 8:55 PM GMT
    meninlove said It's telling that the US world of mortgages required cleaning up in the first place. What happened to the, er, regulations? *being facetious, no need to answer*

    -Doug



    Well, you see, the brilliant government of the united states decided one day that helping certain unqualified people to buy homes that they couldn't afford anyway was more important than to follow common sense guidelines that were already in place -- even if it meant leaving some people out of the buying market. They then decided to tell banks to discard those guidelines and that if anything were to go wrong, the taxpayers would bail them out! So yes, the mortgage meltdown was certainly avoidable by leaving things alone.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 9:01 PM GMT
    Look up facetious Mock. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 9:04 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    socalfitness saidThis thread gives a pretty good indicator about what is wrong with many RJ political threads. Except for the message immediately above this one, all responses were negative without presenting anything related to the original message or anything substantive at all. One of the messages describing the world view of the OP was ludicrous, with no basis in fact. Clearly an example of the shallowness all too often seen here.


    Nope, quite wrong. Likely these guys remember twomack's history on RJ.

    I certainly do, and so do you Socal.

    -Doug

    Irrelevant to the thread if your objective is to discuss the thread topic. If your MO is to attack the thread starter and keep things personal, then that is a different story.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 9:06 PM GMT
    meninlove said Look up facetious Mock. icon_rolleyes.gif


    It was pretty obvious you were kidding, but you also alluded to "regulations" and I thought a little simplistic elaboration was in order.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 9:09 PM GMT
    Socal go back to the OP's post and and read

    "Dream on looters" then tell me who he's referring to.

    The topic is about him, strutting his wealth, and he expressed his disdainful attitude about aiding good old America.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 23, 2010 9:24 PM GMT
    meninlove said Socal go back to the OP's post and and read

    "Dream on looters" then tell me who he's referring to.

    The topic is about him, strutting his wealth, and he expressed his disdainful attitude about aiding good old America.



    Quoted for truth.

  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    Nov 23, 2010 11:40 PM GMT
    More inlining if you don't mind.


    west77 saidI will try to PM you later, but there really is nothing that I will say off the board that I will not say on them. I have no problem admitting that I feel that we are ALL overtaxed, that government does not, in most cases provide good value for what is contributed. I have no problem saying that I do not believe that the rich need to transfer huge amounts of money to the poor. However, somebody needs to pay for government services and it is fair to say that somebody like Blankfein pulling in (2007 numbers) 70 million a year should pay a larger percentage than somebody in Watts pulling in $7000.

    I am not personally a big fan of progressive taxation. That is for another debate I think. I do believe taxation should begin at around $12,000. Keep in mind that the minimum wage is now $15,600 per year. I do not think someone making $7000 should be awarded with an earned income credit when, were they working 40 hours per week, they'd receive that $15,600 in wage.

    340 failed banks so far this year... I know that there are some still lending, but many are just trying to survive. It just came out that the top 6 US banks are facing a 100 - 150 billion shortfall under BASEL III coming into effect soon. Yeah, they will just sell more shares or find a way to fix it, I am not saying that there is anything to worry about. However, it is an example of the health of banks in the U.S right now when the largest are not able to withstand the change in accounting that they all knew for years was coming.

    I assume you are speaking of Canadian banks.

    I'm not worried about BASEL II for most banks.

    I think many perceive a lack of lending from a different perspective. Banks are lending to credit worthy individuals and corporations. Do doc loans are gone. Keep in mind the purpose of a banks -- unless it is an investment bank, a pure invetment bank -- is not to invest but to loan. Specifically in commercial lending to let self-liquidating loans.


    I know that people are not accepting low prices and are forgoing selling their high end properties. However, people in every walk of life are doing the same. The solution is not to be certain that the rich have enough money to buy high end houses (nor to give the poor money to buy houses.) The solution is to wait for the market to correct itself. I do not need to know what the person who owns 15 central park west thinks their condo is worth. I can tell you that if it is not selling, the seller is overvaluing it. (especially at an auction- the true medium to determine an assets value at any given place and point in time.)

    My comment was related to the stability and performance of markets when that person can easily buy and seel at 15 Central Park West. They are tied. In fact, they are tied to the overall health of New York City, a city with the most pervasive form of wealth re-distribution in the nation.

    If I am selling a house in L.A and I demand $300 000 and the market will pay $200 000 it does not mean that my house is worth $300 000. The same thing applies to high end properties. Eventually the market will finish it's correction.

    Something I am well aware of. :-) No need for explanation.


    Finally, I don't really need to make a list of how I spend money each year. Unless you are selling a Hammond B3 organ or own Richie brothers auction (where I will be paying commission to sell 3 pieces of equipment soon) I doubt that I am paying you directly. If it is stocks or resources that you own, I will consider that I am purchasing my resources (Alberta based companies) before any from the U.S...


    The reason I said to e-mail was I do not want to list publicly exactly how you pay me. You do I suspect. What is most often missing from RJ forums is a total lack of expereince in how large players work in this world. Most would be surprised. A few have been close enough to have knowledge. Many of those things that are preached by a few on RJ -- and you agreed you did not support a few of these above -- are more easily deflected than they would think.

    Seems we need to join forces and post a "talking points thread." Give it some thought.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 24, 2010 10:01 AM GMT
    Alright, I will send a PM and just post this for public consumption and clarification.

    I was actually referring to American banks when I gave the number. The link to the FDIC's website listing the banks that have failed this year, the date the FDIC closed on them, the state they were based in and the acquiring institution
    http://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/banklist.html
    They, regretably, do not list any dollar amounts on that site and to find them requires a little more digging than I care for tonight.

    I will assume that it was a typo, but just for clarification, we are up to BASEL III coming into force soon. A Yahoo article on the banks facing a shortfall for BASEL III (I think they mention selling stock to raise the required capital)
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101122/bs_nm/us_banks_basel