Powered by TypePad

« The Ongoing Shoulder Ride For Timothy Geithner | Main | Today's Sign That We Are Headed Into The Crapper »

February 27, 2009



Actually 14 cents is a real bargain (note Gov didn't take it)assuming enough geographic diversity especially if light the foreclosure five.
Assuming 100 % underwater is not rational neither is 86% walk away rate. More scary stories to "depress" the economy

ed in texas

Question is, are they Fannie/Freddie, FHA, or ordinary bank loans. What vintage? 2006-7 are turning out real sucky, but the further back you go, the better they stand up, and the homebuyers are likely to have more equity (less chance of a walkaway). Plus, are they in the 'sand states', because overbuilding assures it'll be a long time before property starts appreciating there again.

Tom Maguire

Well, I fluffed on the Obama plan, so I tossed in a correction.

And since we all have friends, I have a friend who puts in lowball bids on mortgage backed securities to banks. They say no, but a few weeks later when the auditors push for a serious mark to market, my friend's bid is the only one they have. The auditors force a writedown, after which the trader is more amenable to the lowball bid. EZ money.

That doesn't sound like it fits here, since it was a government run auction.

Ignatz Ratzkywatzky

They say no, but a few weeks later when the auditors push for a serious mark to market, my friend's bid is the only one they have. The auditors force a writedown, after which the trader is more amenable to the lowball bid.

Maybe it should be renamed 'make a market' rather than 'mark to market'.


From the linked article...
(You’re much more likely to walk away from your home if you have zero equity and an unaffordable mortgage, as opposed to just zero equity.)

But what about those with zero equity who CAN afford their mortgage payments? How likely are they to walk away from the home? If it's a primary homeowner, I'm guessing not very likely, since they only have to continue making payments to avoid destroying their credit. It's the speculators who are the problem here, the ones who can afford the payments but don't want to. The Obama plan bails them out along with the desperate and foolish who took on too much mortgage.


And btw, the example given by Orin Kramer represents homeowners who clearly have affordable mortgages. There's no danger here of people walking away from mortgages, so why does the government have to step in?

David Pecchia

14 Cents on the Dollar seems like a great deal to me. Lets say the loans were all for $500k, even if all the owners walked-away don't you think you could get easily 70K per house even in this market? I don't think prices have fallen that far anywhere.

Of course, the forclosure process is not cost-free, but two things: 1. Not all of them will default. 2. At 14 Cents on the Dollar, you have a lot of room for expense.

Cecil Turner

Dick Morris nails it:

In addressing this panic, the president of the United States must truly be the leader of the world — showing the way back to confidence.

Instead, Obama has been instrumental in purveying fear and spreading doubt. [. . .]

So, having inherited a recession, his words are creating a depression. He entered office amid a disaster and he is transforming it into a catastrophe, all to pass every last bit of government spending and move us a bit further to the left before his political capital dwindles.

The only winge I have is the risible implication that a sitting senator is entirely blameless (and hence "inherited" the current crisis). The fact that he's using the bully pulpit to advance politics--at our great expense--is incontrovertible.


1. Let the market work it out. You Keynsian Repukes are trying to make water flow uphill...and are transferring wealth from Red State working taxpayers to Blue State Obama voting Goldman sharks.

2. Don't EVER beleive a financier or a government when they claim that the market is misvaluing something and that government can value it better and correct "irrationalism". The market may gyrate and change. It may be "wrong" on occasion. But it will be more right on average than the government. It has arbitrage incentives driving it to that. And the government has political incentives driving it to be wrong.


TCO, take the meds prescribed by the shrink. Throw away all the other pills and the booze.

Breathe deeply and volunteer somewhere.


Cecil, I'd love to know who is making a fortune in the market right now and what connections they have in DC and to the NY Fed.

Besides Geithner...



It's not to make money, but to pass bills, unquestioned bills.

Oh, and Soros.


I know I am being naive but I just don't get the motive here. WHy would anyone want the government to run everything forever, particularly if your days in that government are limited to 4 or 8 years? Is it payback to all the people who got him there? Where does someone get the belief that government is that good? Am I missing something in this whole Obama plan?


Jane, I have asked that question a million times. The only thing that makes sense to me is that Obama is driven by unadulterated lust for power. If so, then he must also believe that his power will extend beyond 4-8 years.

*sigh* but then I think, eh, maybe he's a doofus

The last 28 days have been very discouraging.


More and more I think it all is an expression of mass insanity. Bush Derangement Syndrome gave these people a delusionary belief that we were not being governed well. A successful story in Iraq just put them around the bend. Clearly, CO2 is not a big climate determinant. Clearly the world needs a good cop. Clearly, socialism is counter-productive to improving society.

If we did not have a delusionary press, all this madness would be exposed; now we have to wait on events to become catastrophic. We'll get through it, but oh, what a waste of human effort. And then again, all civilizations in history grew, reached a glorious peak, and then declined. Maybe that's what's happening here.



I'm glad I'm not alone.

Kim, I agree with you.


Well, Jane, that's pretty discouraging.

Rick Ballard

"The only thing that makes sense to me is that Obama is driven by unadulterated lust for power."


What happens to your model if you input "this lad doesn't know sic'em from fetch"? IOW - he's doing very stupid things because he's a very stupid man with advisers no brighter or more experienced than he is. Summer's rode a rising market with Clinton, Geithner sat on his thumb and watched Citi implode under his eyes - who else has Obama got? Rubin is available (when not performing voodoo rituals in an effort to keep Citi animated). Who else?

I don't believe Obama could turn a profit with the only shoeshine stand at O'Hare. He either wouldn't show up or he'd try and talk the polish onto the shoe.

His understanding of economics is derived from the mush pumped into a mostly empty cranial cavity at Columbia - the Harvard Law profs with whom he associated are not noted for their economic acumen.


Funny--all his animus against bankers when one of them--his old white grandma--is the one who supported him and his layabout grandpa.

Old Lurker

Kim, Jane, that tends to be my frame of mind too.

I go back to that Madeline Albright remark that it's not good to have just one superpower...to John Podesta's remark yesterday that now we can empower the middle classes of the entire world ( a heavy burden for our top 2%)...to Obama's thoughts about using our tax dollars to spread our wealth worldwide via the UN and global cap&trade...to all those remarks about how we are raping the earth and using more than our share. Basically I think these people hate the America created by the founders, who based it on a "flawed document", and are happy to see us brought down to the global mean. In Obama, they have the perfect tool for all that. And a critical mass of support to pull it off.

Sad indeed.


Holly, Jane,

His goal is a permanent Democratic majority. It won't be him in power in 8 years, but it'll be some buddy of his, and the Dem agenda will be enacted all down the line, with the tracks laid for a Dem majority well into the future (ACORN is just the beginning).

What isn't will to power is sheer ego - he wants to go down as one of the greatest Presidents ever. The more power he can amass while he's in office, the better chance he has of implementing his plans, which apparently he actually believes will be good for the country. I guess.

It's beyond depressing. I thought I was being a gloomy Gus, paranoid right-wing-nut when I worried obsessively about all this stuff in November. I can't believe it's all coming true and so soon, too.

Rick Ballard


I don't doubt that Obama has a personal vision engendered by a leftist version of the Endarkenment, carefully wrapped in Hegelian historicism and impervious to rational examination. I just think that Holly might have been a bit kind with "doofus". I think he's dumber than most fence posts and completely lost without a teleprompter providing a script. He's a cross between a parrot and a puppet and his handlers are depending on Moveon/ACORN bots to pull off another "success" in '10.

Their problem is that this recession isn't artificial as Volckers choke hold was in '81-'82 and the demographics are nowhere near as favorable today as they were when we came out of the '91-'92 set back.

The Obama Administration's actions to date will do absolutely nothing but reinforce the decline. They are counting on a "natural" turnaround by fall but I've seen nothing to make me believe that it will happen if they keep fumbling and "spending".


Also keep in mind that Obama has never DONE anything. What has he ever done and FAILED at? He's never had to look the cold hard reality in the eye that he did the wrong thing and it may cost him the farm. The Whitehouse is not the place to learn those lessons.



My gut tells me he's a pedigreed moron. But the rapid pace and aggression he has exhibited in his first few weeks in office makes me think I need to . . . think.

It has been a shock to me to see how easily the destruction of the American Dream can be effected.

Scott D

O ne
B ig
A ** (pic of donkey)
M istake
A merica


Odd as it may seem, there really is a frame of mind that things government and the public sector are more capable and qualified to act on behalf of the populace and improve their lives. Unfortunately, 1) such a vision needs to be financed, and those who can most easily made a target and looted are the well-off, and 2) the result of government efforts is usually failure, compared with similar efforts by the private sector, plus a decimation of the ranks of the well-off who were supposed to keep financing the whole scheme.

I have trouble getting my head around that "government is the best actor" mindset, but there it is. Some people really believe it.

This is where we are in these United States of Obama.


that things -> that thinks


The only thing that makes sense to me is that Obama is driven by unadulterated lust for power. If so, then he must also believe that his power will extend beyond 4-8 years.

His examples are Castro and Chavez.

completely lost without a teleprompter providing a script.

The words, that teleprompters show, have to come from somewhere. Someone is creating a
myth that Obama has all of these thoughts and is taking action on them. IMO, that is not true. Someone sent him and someone, other than Obama, is controlling this mess.


From the RBO site, we again see who is really pushing Obama forward.

Connecticut Communists Keep Obama “Dream” Alive by Trevor Loudon, posted February 28, 2009, on his blog,

The Communist Party USA helped put Barack Obama into power and now they’re helping to build a “peoples movement” on his coattails.

Someone posted a remark a few days ago, that the word Socialists turns leftists off.
I don't believe that. I believe that the Socialists/Communists are the controlling power behind Obama. If it wasn't for them, America would not even know who one was talking about when his name was mentioned.
These people have the same beliefs as the ones who put Castro and Chavez in charge in their countries.



It has been a shock to me to see how easily the destruction of the American Dream can be effected.

Faith and family are helpful in times such as this.

Obama's policies seem more-and-more from the Cloward Piven Strategy, which has the added bonus of beinging one of ACORN's organizing principles and written by Columbia professors.

Just guessing but Columbia and Obama's covering up of his time there provides the answer as to who sent him-the Students for a Democratic Society...the founder of SEIU and ACORN was a high ranking member of SDS (and SEIU is run by a former high ranking SDS member), his only private employer had SDS ties, his friend and mentor was a high ranking member of SDS.

His campaign was almost like a 40th Year reunion of the Class of 68 student radicals and student communist movement.


Obama's multiple abandonments by father and mother and being forced on grandparents who were ineffective the first time around, made him ripe for influence from a very lefty educational establishment.

He was absolute putty in their hands.

The comments to this entry are closed.