[b]Eng[/b].
The pessimist learns Chinese, the optimist English, and the realist the automatic machine ak47!: (
As it is sad, but the history of a human civilisation obliges to escalating of military power.
I would like to see here disputes not about that “yes” or “was not present”, and when, whom and with whom.

Хотел бы узнать вашу точку зрения. Возможно у кого ещё случалось нечто похожее?

Нужны игры, кто нибудь знает, где брать игры для PSP ?

If your not a California resident, the Governator has already started the tumble by asking all government sectors to cut back spending and defer funding for many programs in a mid-year change in current spending. Although it’s still unclear what & how much of a cut in spending he’s looking for or needing in the coming years….?? Right now the state is @ 15 Billion deficit for their budget. Check this site for details: http://www.cbp.org/ and you will see that much of the cuts come by way of the schools and medicade programs. It will create some real challenges in our state economy as the job market is also seeing the unemployment rates creep up with the recent issue of the mortgage lenders and those involved in the construction industry. I also read an article on the MSN website indicating that their was a recent surge in people who were now tapping their 401K plans to keep them afloat…(the main article used an individual located in Irvine, California) this is pretty scary that folks are having to pull money from their retirements in order to make their monthly living expenses during the prime working years.

The other very interesting question that another commenter raised above is property taxes. I am very interested (to know what the bursted bubble in OC is going to do to the school districts. The makeshift school buildings are evidence enough that California lacks sufficient investment in education. But with less property tax revenue being collected by the county over the next several years, what impact will this have on educational facilities and communities? I guess we’ll just borrow more money at credit card rates to tide us over?

Your statement, “2. Affordability is the issue, and indeed, I feel it should be addressed. I would rather see a local median-income based payment cap, along with mandated dti (debt to income) ratios.”, is one issue in particular that has caused much of the nationwide foreclosures.

I can’t wait for the next presidental election and I suspect the people are gonna come out in droves tired by many things gone wrong in US economy, housing, jobs the war.

Until we have a new administration and plans that will work we just kinda stumble and try to see the good and bad in the situation.

To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, if you were to call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have? Of course, the answer is 4. Regardless of what you call it, a tail is a tail, a leg is a leg, and a tail is not a leg. Dogs have 4 legs.

Similarly, if you were to call what is defined a non-comforming loan today a conforming loan tomorrow, would bond purchasers be happy with returns indicative of a lower risk security?

The answer, of course, is no.

The fact of that matter is that asset backed paper secured by $700,000 mortgages has more downside risk in the current market than asset backed paper secured by $417,000 (and lower) mortgages.

If you don’t compensate buyers of that paper for the additional risk, it will pile up at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Not only will this have a negative impact on what is defined as conforming today, but it will make taxpayers the ultimate bagholders for FBers everywhere.

The bond insurance guys are headed to default as soon as someone defaults? How stupid is that.

I’m not sure a collapse of M3 would be all that bad of a thing (in retrospect of a 30-40 yr time span).

I also rememeber my grandfather speaking about the depression. He seemed to remember people who had even small amounts of cash stashed away did OK. People in debt were crushed.

I’m in debt with a car loan….

You know Chuck; I am not against having incentives or rewards to housing investments. However, its a delicate balancing act.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/0.....ahoo_quote

Perhaps its later in the game then we thought.

GSE’s were created by the government to provide liquidity to the home market, nothing else. They are privately owned, and the bonds are owned by investors.

The implied guarantee may turn out to be nothing more than a pipe dream if the fit hit the shan, but I’d be willing to wager that Congress would step in if the GSEs were to fail. They truly are “too big to fail”. Even with the portfolio caps.

I’ve struggled with the concept of needing this kind of effective market “grease” without the explicit government oversight.

Either way, the real issue is the bond insurers. If they lose their ratings, effectively all of their bonds go down with them. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a depression after something like that. Remember, this is all a confidence game. Nobody believes it will fail. Anyone gets a whiff of risk, exits will be packed so fast, you won’t be able to find a way out yourself. The entire investment community of the world would be brought to its knees. No joke.

I guess that would explain the nature of the beast a bit more.

I suspect people are going to find out the bonds were far less of a sure thing than advertised.

What is wrong with letting the market place work itself out. It will be painful for some in the industry, but nothing is better that a flushing of the system to get things back to a clean professional way or operating. I read 18-24 months of this rapid fall in housing prices. It would take the government 12 of those months to saddle everyone with some new have baked regulations that will only add to the cost of doing business. All we have to do is look at the last bubble and its gang of over zealous executives and see what the government did to help out. Now there are new accounting regulations that have drowned small companies and compounded the problems of medium and large corporations. The government can help by getting out of the way.

But, California will nearly always be more expensive to buy a home due to the favorable climate, and job opportunities that seem to be present for the foreseeable future. Why should Californians have to pay 25% higher rates?

In the long run, it won’t matter, after market disruptions, someone comes in to provide support. It’s just a matter of time and at what level that support comes in at.

Chuck Ponzi

I don’t think it will work either since this would effectively make the Govt the primary Mortgage underwriter in the US as opposed to the private sector. No one will buy the securities knowing that they are garbage.