Financial Crisis

[Abrak]

a personal message to you Abrak. i can't judge your "performance" but without any doubt you possess a wealth of financial knowledge. however, the former "anal" shows in nearly each of your postings and i strongly doubt that most interested readers can easily follow your argumentation. what you have to keep in mind is that this is not a forum for MBAs who are to be lectured to prepare them for a dissertation to obtain a Ph.D. degree.

no offence meant!

No offence taken! But as you say 'I will not be pacified' and I am 'just trying to draw my own conclusions'. Unlike when I was an 'anal' I have no obligation to make my posts readable. (BTW I suspect that you simply find my posts overly long than overly complicated.) At the end of the day, if you read postings on the internet, you do so at your own risk.

So I write what I want to write - and I do not think my postings are destructive to thread. And while I maybe overly 'anal' you criticize other postings for being overly 'banal'.

Incidentally, you also mention that this thread should be more about Thailand. I agree and have several times tried to switch the focus away from the US to Thailand. However, I have noticed that noone seems to be the least bit interested in the economy of this country. If it was a Thailand based thread I probably would be the 'optimist' who thinks the Thai economy might grow at 5% next year.

[12DrinkMore]

So where does the UK stand with the banking bailouts?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/polit...ut-1833830.html

Government support for Britain's banks has reached a staggering £850bn and the eventual cost to taxpayers will not be known for years, the public spending watchdog says today

And it looks like at RBS, instead of mass sackings and resignations by the responsible, the board is threatening to resign if they can't pay out huge bonuses.

Lord Myners, the City minister, admitted that many hundreds of the £1m-plus bonus payouts to 5,000 bankers in the new year would be at RBS. Some could receive £15m each.

Well, IMO the bluff should be called. This is tax payers' money and they are all defacto government employees. But it won't.

I get the impression that there are two currencies in circulation. The normal sheoples' currency, where amounts greater than a thousand Quid are rarely dealt in, and concern over a couple of quid extra per week for the pensioners is a major political issue. And then we have the "other" currency, where the unit is in the million.

Actually, come to think about it, there is a third unit of currency, the Billion. This is by now so far removed from the pensioners' extra 3 Quid/week that nobody can really comprehend what a Billion Quid is, they just get handed over to the banks in the name of "saving the economy" or some such bullshit.

And for all the British tax payers,

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/finance...-class-war.html

Brown is scorching the earth in his attempt to either stay in power or keep the Tory lot from not getting in power. As "Binky" commented, maybe it's time for a change: vote BNP and may our Gods help us all.

:D

[12DrinkMore]

a personal message to you Abrak. i can't judge your "performance" but without any doubt you possess a wealth of financial knowledge. however, the former "anal" shows in nearly each of your postings and i strongly doubt that most interested readers can easily follow your argumentation. what you have to keep in mind is that this is not a forum for MBAs who are to be lectured to prepare them for a dissertation to obtain a Ph.D. degree.

I recognize that it was a personal message but...........

I vastly prefer a post that may be overly complicated & cause me to look up information to a post that is a hollow shell.

Not to imply

Posts that makes one think or see from a different perspective is always welcomed

Well, it was hardly a personal message, but Abrak gets my vote too

He may at times be a little obscure, but I personally have learned from the ideas that he has put forward. So another for Abrak.

[churchill]

BUT THE REAL WORD IS FULL OF POOR PEOPLE, SAY BANKERS

BANKERS last night rejected calls to live in the real world insisting it was full of badly-dressed poor people with only one house.

Senior ministers launched a stinging attack on the banks yesterday insisting they had to act more responsibly if they were going to let them invest the profits they made on all the houses they bought with taxpayers' money.

But the British Banker's Association hit back, claiming it would be impossible for its members to inhabit the same world as people who do not own cliff-top property in Sardinia and float around on a cushion of air.

Full article at http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/busines...s-200912042283/

[thaidrew]

Second that 12D. I have also learned a lot. Not being the sharpest person, or having the benefit of much of an education it is educational, if a little difficult at times to comprehend, but definitely illuminating and refreshing to see the view of an expert.

Regards TH

[Abrak]

So where does the UK stand with the banking bailouts?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/polit...ut-1833830.html

Government support for Britain's banks has reached a staggering £850bn and the eventual cost to taxpayers will not be known for years, the public spending watchdog says today

And it looks like at RBS, instead of mass sackings and resignations by the responsible, the board is threatening to resign if they can't pay out huge bonuses.

Lord Myners, the City minister, admitted that many hundreds of the £1m-plus bonus payouts to 5,000 bankers in the new year would be at RBS. Some could receive £15m each.

Well, IMO the bluff should be called. This is tax payers' money and they are all defacto government employees. But it won't.

Look 12Drinkmore, you started this threacd by offering to go round and shoot everyone responsible. Now you are reduced to 'calling their bluff'. Why not simply accept their kind offer to resign (if you sacked then you would have to pay compensation.)

One of the (many) things that annoy me about banking is they way they account for profits. I mean if you lend someone money you actually dont know whether you have made a profit until he pays you back (whatever the interest charge). So you go on booking profits and lending more, booking more profits, until your initial assessment that he was solvent turns into an assessment that he is bankrupt. So if you look at banks it is not really clear that they ever make money over time. What is very clear is that after 'bonuses and dividends', they do not make money (net of Government support).

And this whole situation is the Government's fault. Both Brown and Bernanke point out that banks need to be reregulated as a lesson from the crisis, but neither of them have done anything about it. And bankers are simply as greedy as they are allowed to get away with. So maybe shooting a few would help the situation.

[midas]

Second that 12D. I have also learned a lot. Not being the sharpest person, or having the benefit of much of an education it is educational, if a little difficult at times to comprehend, but definitely illuminating and refreshing to see the view of an expert.

Regards TH

I also agree that Abrak' s postings are very thought provoking.

[Abrak]

Second that 12D. I have also learned a lot. Not being the sharpest person, or having the benefit of much of an education it is educational, if a little difficult at times to comprehend, but definitely illuminating and refreshing to see the view of an expert.

Regards TH

I dont know whether this was praise or a 'dig'. I am not an 'expert' (although my posts might occasionally indicate otherwise) which is why some people find them pretentious and irritating. I am trying to 'muddle through' these problems like eveyone else.

[Naam]

So I write what I want to write - and I do not think my postings are destructive to thread. And while I maybe overly 'anal' you criticize other postings for being overly 'banal'.

let's get that straight. i did not mean to criticise you nor do i think your postings are destructive to this thread. personally i read every line you write. what i made was an observation thinking of a bunch of readers who without an economic background must have great difficulties to understand your expressions. even i had to ask once but that was due to my poor knowledge of the english language.

that highly educated and exalted political, financial and macroeconomic experts, like Flying and 12D sing your laudatio in chorus i can fully understand. they also have the advantage of mastering english because it's their native language

[thaidrew]

I dont know whether this was praise or a 'dig'. I am not an 'expert' (although my posts might occasionally indicate otherwise) which is why some people find them pretentious and irritating. I am trying to 'muddle through' these problems like eveyone else. (quote Abrak)

Sorry for not making things clear. I certainly had no intention of providing a 'dig'. You obviously have extensive financial knowledge that I do not, and I have benefited from reading same in as much as it is within my capacity to learn.

Please keep up with your comments and observations as I am sure others must get benefit too.

Regards TH

[AlexLah]

So let us have a look at the economic situation of Thailand.

1. How many Thai people are loosing their job each month?

2. How many factories or businesses are closed each month and how many new are started?

3. By how many % have the house/condo prices declined YTD?

4. How many banks blew up or had to be saved by the government?

5. How many people as a % live on some kind of government support (if there exist any).

6. How much money has been borrowed by the government as a % of GDP to stimulate the economy?

If all these are put into a chart and compared to the US situation, how does the economic situation in Thailand look like?

[flying]

Look 12Drinkmore, you started this threacd by offering to go round and shoot everyone responsible. Now you are reduced to 'calling their bluff'. Why not simply accept their kind offer to resign (if you sacked then you would have to pay compensation.)

One of the (many) things that annoy me about banking is they way they account for profits. I mean if you lend someone money you actually dont know whether you have made a profit until he pays you back (whatever the interest charge). So you go on booking profits and lending more, booking more profits, until your initial assessment that he was solvent turns into an assessment that he is bankrupt. So if you look at banks it is not really clear that they ever make money over time. What is very clear is that after 'bonuses and dividends', they do not make money (net of Government support).

And this whole situation is the Government's fault. Both Brown and Bernanke point out that banks need to be reregulated as a lesson from the crisis, but neither of them have done anything about it. And bankers are simply as greedy as they are allowed to get away with. So maybe shooting a few would help the situation.

Agree on calling their bluff....Also agree on shooting a few.... or more would do wonders. But I would prefer to starve the beast

As for banks making money I would have to say from my view they make it hand over fist.

Start with fraction reserve banking what they do with each $1000 deposit they get. What interest they pay on it & how many times over they lend it & at what interest. Then continue & look for instance at residential mortgages.

They lay it out to take massive interest up front. Look at any amortization schedule.....

Take a sample 500k 30 year loan @ what ever interest rate & look at what they make in the first 3-5 years in interest alone.

Look at how the principal has been barely scratched.

If the borrower defaults & walks they have the asset to sell or take a write down on their books.

Lastly take a look at the recent year & the $$$ they got from the government at what rates & what did they do with it all?

Yes I would say they do fine as always.

As a side note...Captain Harmonica may be dancing in the streets today seeing the dollar go up a full cent

Edited December 4, 2009 by flying

[midas]

flying I remember your posting some time ago about how they calculate unemployment figures in USA.

I thought you may be interested in this

TrimTabs: The Real Job Loss Number Was 255,000

TrimTabs employment analysis, which uses real-time daily income tax deposits from all U.S. taxpayers to compute employment growth, estimated that the U.S. economy shed 255,000 jobs in November. This past month’s results were an improvement of only 10.2% from the 284,000 jobs lost in October.

http://www.businessinsider.com/trimtabs-th...-255000-2009-12

If TrimTabs can do this, why cant the government produce statistics using tax deposits and computers ?

[flying]

flying I remember your posting some time ago about how they calculate unemployment figures in USA.

I thought you may be interested in this

TrimTabs: The Real Job Loss Number Was 255,000

TrimTabs employment analysis, which uses real-time daily income tax deposits from all U.S. taxpayers to compute employment growth, estimated that the U.S. economy shed 255,000 jobs in November. This past month’s results were an improvement of only 10.2% from the 284,000 jobs lost in October.

http://www.businessinsider.com/trimtabs-th...-255000-2009-12

If TrimTabs can do this, why cant the government produce statistics using tax deposits and computers ?

Interesting & what others have shown too...... & yes I posted how they calc the numbers by polling 60k families...etc.

http://web.streetauthority.com/terms/u/unemployment-rate.asp

But what is the clearest view of how good this propaganda machine runs was watching Zobama's speech today.

Basically talking the talk & the feel good speech. As if anything was done to actually create job 1.

While unemployment honestly hovers at 17%

Instead it was a big celebration of how they can show they lost only 11,000 (their BS number) or so more jobs last month.

Never noticing that the continued loss of jobs especially jobs that manufacture a product is no cause for celebration.

Even if jobs are eventually replaced it seems they will be service industry jobs these days & not manufacturing jobs.

What will that mean?....It will mean ? Less production & higher costs for goods?

Do not forget we are in the midst of BS Bernanke's confirmation hearings.

We need the PR machine at full throttle.

Also this would be even funnier if it were not all 100% true

Edited December 5, 2009 by flying

[midas]

Instead it was a big celebration of how they can show they lost only 11,000 (their BS number)

It’s both fascinating and distressing to watch a government that is so utterly

desperate to distort statistics in a futile attempt to boost confidence

when surely the best way to restore confidence would be to have a financial system

( and regulatory system ) that you could actually trust?

This is another interesting question about jobs :-

FAQ: How can the unemployment rate fall if the economy is losing net jobs, especially since the population is growing?

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/12/...bs-why-did.html

[Abrak]

So let us have a look at the economic situation of Thailand.

1. How many Thai people are loosing their job each month?

2. How many factories or businesses are closed each month and how many new are started?

3. By how many % have the house/condo prices declined YTD?

4. How many banks blew up or had to be saved by the government?

5. How many people as a % live on some kind of government support (if there exist any).

6. How much money has been borrowed by the government as a % of GDP to stimulate the economy?

If all these are put into a chart and compared to the US situation, how does the economic situation in Thailand look like?

Ok Alexjah,

Without answering any of your questions, here is a fairly simple and easy way to consider how the two countries are comparing economically.

US...............................................2008 2009

GDP..............................................-1.0...........-2.5

Current A/C S:(D) %GDP................-6.0...........-3.5

Fiscal S:(D) % GDP.........................-4.0.........-11.0

Twin S:(D) % GDP........................-10.0..........-14.5

Thailand.......................................2008 2009

GDP..............................................+2.0..........-2.5

Current A/C S:(D) %GDP..................0.0.........+9.0

Fiscal S:(D) % GDP..........................-2.0.........-4.0

Twin S:(D) % GDP...........................-2.0.........+5.0

(All numbers guestimates) (S= surplus +/ve, D = deficit =/ve)

So if you look at the basic headline GDP numbers then perhaps one can say that Thailand has suffered more in this recession. However the financing side is very important. At some point in order for growth to be 'real' it has to be self-financing (or close to it.) In 2008, the US had a twin deficit largely due to excess private sector consumption resulting in a large current account deficit. This year the Government took over the excess spending program and the twin deficit increased from 10% to 14%. This is the financing requirement of the private economy.

Now if you look at Thailand the situation is very different. A large squeeze on the domestic economy (which reduced imports) saw a huge C/A surplus emerge. And the squeeze on the economy was not alleviated by massive Government spending. So Thailand's 'quantity' dosnt look good but its 'quality' is inherently much higher (both in actual terms - its GDP was self financing before and now it is understated) and in trend (Thailand's +7% of GDP change in financing, compared to the US -4.0%).

Another way to look at this is to ask what would be their GDP growth if Thailand had run an 11% fiscal deficit and the US a 4% fiscal deficit. And Thailand's GDP would still be better financed than the US.

The other vaguely intuitive reason to be optimistic about Thailand is that its economy is manufacturing, export orientated and therefore inherently more cyclical in a recession than one that is not. During the destocking stage of the cycle demand for its products fall faster than underlying growth. April exports were down 25% YOY which is pretty tough for a country where exports are over 40% of GDP. Octobers exports were up 43% of April.

[Abrak]

FAQ: How can the unemployment rate fall if the economy is losing net jobs, especially since the population is growing?

Obviously, this statement sounds counter intuitive but as far as I can see the job numbers are very good and pretty good quality.

The easiest way to make this statement add up is to take out enough people from your 'total employment base' which if your population is growing seems to be a 'fudge'. However U.6 which includes a lot of 'discouraged' workers also declined.

So to me the numbers are good and can be vaguely reconciled for the following...

1) Both September and October employment numbers have been revised up (by some 300,000). So it is not so much there has been a decline in unemployment in November as the fact that October was overstated.

2) The October number includes a +250,000 seasonal factor, while the November includes a -100,000 seasonal factor. In other words November 'pay roll numbers' would have been +89,000 or so without seasonal adjustment. If you looked at actual numbers then you can see why they would be misleading.

3) Finally the household survey is now leading the payroll survey. The household survey showed an increase of 227,000 employed. Payroll lags in a recovery because say large companies simply increase the hours worked by existing employees before hiring more.

[Abrak]

Here's a great chart on the US economy from Krugman's site but produced by Goldman's.

It shows the impact of GDP of both fiscal policy and the inventory cycle.

Now against those numbers consider actual GDP. 1Q - 6.5%, 2Q -0.75% and 3Q +2.75% - you can see without those factors underlying GDP was approximately - -4.5% 1Q, -1.75% 2Q, -1.5% 3Q. You can also see what sort of happens in the future which is after a bigger boost in 4Q, the US is hoping that a self-sustained recovery will take over and that from 1Q 2010 these factors will be negative to the numbers.

Ultimately these factors are going to be a drag on recovery, that would certainly rule out anything approximating 'V' shaped. However, the built in fiscal drag on the economy is based on a decent recovery to growth - if that doesnt happen I guess you should assume there will be a renewed, fiscal stimulus.

[hhgz]

"if that doesnt happen I guess you should assume there will be a renewed, fiscal stimulus."

Interestingly, much of the stimulus money that was authorized to be spent under both Bush43 and Obama has yet to be spent.

[midas]

as far as I can see the job numbers are very good and pretty good quality.

If you are referring to the BLS numbers, personally I would never believe any US

government statistics now because they have lied about so many things.

But what that hasn’t been mentioned much in all this is about the trend that

small companies are using more independent contractors, rather than hiring permanent employees.

For an ‘independent contractor’ there will be no benefits, no health insurance,

they pay their own employment taxes, etc.

The point is if there is no long term certainty with a job I can’t see those contractors

opening their wallets the same way a permanent employee does and

would they be able to qualify for a mortgage as a contractor or keep up the payments ?

[flying]

Ben Bernanke’s Hyperinflation And Economic Collapse

Yesterday, Federal Reserve Chief Ben Bernanke was in front of the Senate Banking Committee trying to hold on to his job. Some Senators were complimentary on Bernanke’s job. Republican Senator Judd Gregg from New Hampshire gave the Fed Chairman a warm welcome. Judd said, “If you hadn’t been there, and hadn’t been willing to take extraordinary action last fall, last winter, and even early spring … it’s very likely we would be experiencing a depression…” I look at Bernanke’s performance during the financial crisis the same way I would look at a drunken bus driver who crashes and then stumbles around pulling a few children out of the wreckage. In my eyes, Bernanke is hardly a hero.

Republican Jim Bunning from Kentucky, on the other hand, couldn’t have given a colder reception if he greeted Bernanke in the North Pole. Bunning said, in part, “Rather than making management, shareholders, and debt holders feel the consequences of their risk-taking, you bailed them out. In short, you are the definition of moral hazard.” Bunning, a former Major League pitcher, hurled another fast ball at Bernanke’s head when he said, “Because you bowed to pressure from the banks and refused to resolve them or force them to clean up their balance sheets and clean out the management, you have created zombie banks that are only enriching their traders and executives.” Senator Bunning vowed to do everything possible to stop Bernanke’s nomination and to “end the Fed’s failures.”

Nice speech, but according to economist John Williams of Shadow Government Statistics, it is too late. In Williams latest report he writes “The United States Economy and Financial System Face an Eventual Great Collapse.” Williams told me in an interview this week that because of all the bailouts, stimulus packages, giveaways and short-term debt, the U.S. has to finance nearly $5 trillion in 2010 alone. That’s about $96 billion in debt auctioned off each and every week!! Williams said, “Someone has to buy those Treasuries, and if no one does, then the Federal Reserve will become buyers of last resort.” The Fed buying that much in Treasuries is the same as printing huge amounts of money. Williams says that “is the tipping point that will start a dollar crisis.” According to Williams, this will produce a “high risk of an ultimate dollar crisis that will begin unfolding in year ahead.”

Inflation created by this “dollar crisis” will turn into hyperinflation within 5 years. Government and Fed actions have caused this problem and Williams sees “no way out,” and “hyperinflation is just a matter of time.” The hyperinflation forecasted by Shadow Government Statistics will look like Weimar Germany in the early 1920’s. The dollar will rapidly lose value to the point it will take a wheelbarrow full of cash to buy a loaf of bread or a gallon of gas. Anyone on fixed income or holding dollars will be wiped out according to Williams.

The Gold market seems to be reflecting the fear of inflation and a weakening dollar. Big central banks are buying Gold. India bought 200 metric tons of the yellow metal last month. Other countries, such as China and Russia, are also gold buyers. Retail investors are, likewise, beginning to flock to gold. Arthur Blumenthal of Stack’s Rare Coins in New York City has been in the gold and coin business since 1974. Stack’s opened its doors in 1934 and is the oldest coin dealer in America. Blumenthal saw the “go-go years” of the late seventies gold market firsthand. Blumenthal told me, “I have never seen anything like this before! There are only buyers.” He says many of his customers are “Wall Street types who are buying physical gold for the first time.”

Williams says buying gold and silver “long term” will be your best defense against a “great collapse…dollar crisis… and hyperinflation.” Williams also says you should stock up on food and other necessary supplies because the coming crisis will create shortages in all sorts of things.

I predict Mr. Bernanke will keep his job at the Federal Reserve. That might be poetic justice because this Fed Chief should witness his handy work firsthand. What is coming to America might go down in history as Ben Bernanke’s Hyperinflation and Economic Collapse.

Edited December 5, 2009 by flying

[flying]

-i find it ridiculous to focus on the Greatest Nation on Earth™ as if we are back in the 70s and 80s when the proverbial "the U.S. of A. sneezes, the rest of the world gets pneumonia" was applicable.

-in my view the discussion should cover mainly the global economic situation, especially the country we live in, and not incidents which are irrelevant to that situation such as "a bank in Duluth, Minnesota (one of the thousands of superfluous shitty american banks which wanted to piss with the big dogs but couldn't lift the leg) went belly-up and now the FDIC is in the red".

I wonder about that..........

Yes it is a global market & yes perhaps the crisis in the US will not collapse all.

But still the mere fact that so many others hold so much in Treasuries will it not have an effect on those countries if those USD continue to devalue?

That the USD is the most widely held reserve currency in the world today & makes up 64% of Currency composition of official foreign exchange reserves....That is bound to leave a stain if it has a cough eh?

As for the lil banks that wanted to pee with the big dogs....Yes they were not bailed as they were not deemed Too Big Too Fail But even just ten of them out of 130 so far had combined assets of 92 Billion USD....More than the Dubai skirmish.

That is just 10 of the 130..........So far

I am not saying it is the main point of the financial crisis but it is a branch for sure IMO

Edited December 5, 2009 by flying

[jazzbo]

Re Kuhn N.'s I find it ridiculous to focus on the Greatest Nation on Earth™ I have now found that a streaming radio station in the USA does a re-broadcast of Rush Limbaugh at 1 PM Bangkok time so I can listen to THE greatest right wing wacko in the world and no longer have to read the pikers herein to get my near-daily Libertarian fix. According to an Op-Ed in The Wall Street Journal wrintten by El Rushbo in 2005:

# I love being a conservative. We conservatives are proud of our philosophy. Unlike our liberal friends, who are constantly looking for new words to conceal their true beliefs and are in a perpetual state of reinvention, we conservatives are unapologetic about our ideals.

# We are confident in our principles and energetic about openly advancing them. We believe in individual liberty, limited government, capitalism, the rule of law, faith, a color-blind society and national security.

# We support school choice, enterprise zones, tax cuts, welfare reform, faith-based initiatives, political speech, homeowner rights and the War on Terrorism.

# And at our core we embrace and celebrate the most magnificent governing document ever ratified by any nation — the U.S. Constitution. Along with the Declaration of Independence, which recognizes our God-given natural right to be free, it is the foundation on which our government is built and has enabled us to flourish as a people.

# We conservatives are never stronger than when we are advancing our principles.

BTW According to Dictionary.com: PIKER (n.) -- 1. a person who does anything in a contemptibly small or cheap way. BTW2 when I lived in Oklahoma in the 90s, luncheon spots used to advertise that they would play RL during the noon lunch hour so that you would not have to miss a precious minute of right-wing diatribe.

Edited December 6, 2009 by jazzbo

[jazzbo]

BTW3 Rush Limbaugh is syndicated over a 600 USA radio station-network and also on US Armed Forces Radio overseas so audience estimations are fragmented. However, based on several published estimates, I would say that on any given weekday the audience is between 2% and 7% of the total USA population.

[midas]

Alternative Investments: Real Estate

Direct Investments: Recovery in many

global direct commercial real estate markets

should continue in 2010 thanks to improved

fundamentals such as relatively attractive

valuations.

Real Estate Equities: After a short-term

consolidation, real estate equities should

move higher going into Q1 2010 as liquidity

and macroeconomic conditions remain favorable.

Do they mean like this

The largest real estate deal in Chicago history is turning into the biggest example of the grim plight of many properties in the city's downtown office market.

A venture led by New York-based Tishman Speyer Properties has defaulted on part of a package of loans used to finance the $1.72-billion purchase of six prime office towers in Chicago's Loop during the frenzied real estate market of 2007, sources familiar with the deal say.

oh and the Federal Reserve is the the main lender via its Maiden Lane I program

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20091205/FREE/912059998

Edited December 6, 2009 by midas

[jazzbo]

A venture led by New York-based Tishman Speyer Properties has defaulted on part of a package of loans used to finance the $1.72-billion purchase...

A Tishman-led venture is in default on a mezzanine loan of undetermined size,

part of

an estimated $1.4-billion package of mortgages, sources say...The tough tactic is apparently intended to force Tishman Speyer to invest more of its own money in the deal but could backfire... The Fed

inherited

the mortgages as part of the 2008 collapse and sale of Wall Street investment bank Bear Stearns Cos.

How salacious -- 'love those Henny Penny headlines that don't hold up if you actually READ the f---ing article. So stick your emoticon OH! where it belongs.

[AlexLah]

Fight back!

Many lenders have bundled up and repacked their loans and sold them to investors.

Which means you have not contracted with the investor who bought your debt. Ask them to produce the note with wet ink signature of both parties.

More about this here: http://www.consumerwarningnetwork.com/2009...duce-the-note-6

[midas]

Fight back!

Many lenders have bundled up and repacked their loans and sold them to investors.

Which means you have not contracted with the investor who bought your debt. Ask them to produce the note with wet ink signature of both parties.

More about this here: http://www.consumerwarningnetwork.com/2009...duce-the-note-6

Its a total mess Alex

And meanwhile things are not going as Obama's Admin had planned with the loan modifications

Why Many Home Loan Modifications Fail

I listened to one call from a woman who sounded as if her world were collapsing. She and her husband operated a business, which seemed to be teetering near collapse, and its finances were intertwined with theirs. They were behind in payments on their mortgage.

Under the administration’s mortgage modification program, the new payment, including escrow payments for taxes and insurance, is to be 31 percent of the borrower’s gross monthly income. The woman first said their income was $6,000 a month, the amount they had taken out of the business when times were good.

That number, it turned out, was too high to qualify for a modification. When told that, the woman said she thought that for at least the next couple of months, they might be able to take only $2,000. That number was too low. She got no modification that day. Had she come up with a number somewhere in between, she might have qualified.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/04/business...mp;ref=business

[midas]

How salacious -- 'love those Henny Penny headlines that don't hold up if you actually READ the f---ing article. So stick your emoticon OH! where it belongs.

Perhaps this headline is easier for you to understand jazzbo

Wilbur Ross Sees ‘Huge’ Commercial Real Estate Crash

“All of the components of real estate value are going in the wrong direction simultaneously,” said Ross, one of nine money managers participating in a government program to remove toxic assets from bank balance sheets. “Occupancy rates are going down. Rent rates are going down and the capitalization rate -- the return that investors are demanding to buy a property -- are going up.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...w1_g&pos=10

So how meaningful is " real estate markets should continue in 2010 thanks to improved fundamentals such as relatively attractive valuations " ?

And with regards to global markets things dont look any better

Outlook for commercial property rents around the world dismal

Across the globe rents are plummeting and the outlook is pessimistic says the Global Property Survey from the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors.Indeed the report records the sharpest decline in global commercial property rents in the survey's five year history. Singapore, Ukraine, Spain and Irelands are the worst affected while Hong Kong is the only market showing some signs of improvement.

[teletiger]

-i find it ridiculous to focus on the Greatest Nation on Earth™ as if we are back in the 70s and 80s when the proverbial "the U.S. of A. sneezes, the rest of the world gets pneumonia" was applicable.

-in my view the discussion should cover mainly the global economic situation, especially the country we live in, and not incidents which are irrelevant to that situation such as "a bank in Duluth, Minnesota (one of the thousands of superfluous shitty american banks which wanted to piss with the big dogs but couldn't lift the leg) went belly-up and now the FDIC is in the red".

I wonder about that..........

Yes it is a global market & yes perhaps the crisis in the US will not collapse all.

But still the mere fact that so many others hold so much in Treasuries will it not have an effect on those countries if those USD continue to devalue?

That the USD is the most widely held reserve currency in the world today & makes up 64% of Currency composition of official foreign exchange reserves....That is bound to leave a stain if it has a cough eh?

As for the lil banks that wanted to pee with the big dogs....Yes they were not bailed as they were not deemed Too Big Too Fail But even just ten of them out of 130 so far had combined assets of 92 Billion USD....More than the Dubai skirmish.

That is just 10 of the 130..........So far

What if they took the big dog down?

"They're going to kill the Fed"

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/20091203/t...ng-kill-fed.htm

Regards.