Powered by TypePad

« Tax Cut Fever Dream, Or Trial Balloon? | Main | Harold And Barack Escape From Bagram »

December 04, 2010

Comments

anduril

The JPost has a quaint editorial. Noting in its first paragraph that:

http://www.jpost.com/LandedPages/PrintArticle.aspx?id=197838

The Israel Democracy Institute’s annual survey of sentiments toward democracy among Israelis, released this week, revealed disturbing levels of Jewish intolerance toward Arab Israelis.

For instance, 53 percent of the Jewish public said that the state was entitled to encourage Arabs to emigrate from Israel; 55% said that Jewish municipalities should receive more state funding than Arab municipalities; 46% admitted to being bothered by the possibility of having Arabs as neighbors.

the editorial urges Israelis, in the title, to: Strike a democratic bargain.

What would a "democratic bargain" look like? Fortunately the editorial writers don't leave us in suspense for long:

State funding still discriminates against the Arab municipalities and the Arab school system, though it has improved significantly in recent years.

And Arab Israelis are underrepresented in the public sector, not just because of security concerns.

But Arab Israelis must also change their attitude toward Israel. They cannot expected to become Zionist patriots. But it should still be possible to strike a democratic bargain – one whereby Israel would undertake to carry out a wide range of anti-discrimination programs to make up for years of neglect, and Israeli Arabs, for their part, would choose leaders willing to accept minority status and work within the framework of a Jewish, democratic state rather than seek to overthrow it. If such an arrangement could be reached, the vast majority of Jewish Israelis would be significantly more tolerant of their fellow Arab citizens.

Such a deal! Accept minority status--even though Arabs are not in fact a minority within the "Israeli empire," as Ynet correctly terms it. What's not to like about that? Well, there's the little matter that David Ben-Gurion noted:

Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country ... There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?
narciso the harpoon

Selfawareness, is a virtue we should entertain more thoroughly, yet we don't in the LUN

Chubby

Rick

((I did not find the few seeds to be found in Hendry's piece to be worth the effort of picking through his literary manure pile.))

Is there any financial commenter out there whose viewpoints you think are worthwhile?

macphisto

perhaps i'll begin to give a flying fuck about the Palestinians after Poland is restored to its pre-1918 territory. or after a rational solution is found to the arbitrary and artificial nature of the states imposed upon the rest of the Middle East post-Versailles. or after the Kurds have a state. or after the many other unjust situations endured by peoples who didn't bring their problems on themselves by repeated acts of aggression are settled. in other words, get in the queue with the rest of the punters, Hadji.

Pagar

"If the chain of ownership was not prperly documented, that is an issue but it should not benefit the deadbeat. Not for one more day.

And foreclosure should be handled nonjudicially."

The chain of ownership was not properly documented because the Banking industry thought that they could lie, cheat and steal from who ever they pleased and people would say It's OK to lie, cheat and steal from people as long as you are a bank. However, if customers lie, cheat and steal from us we'll destroy them. This is insane! Fix the fraud first and than foreclose lawfully in what ever manner is proscribed by state law. But fix the fraud first. Without the fraud from the banks and government agencies most of this mess would never have occurred.

We've been waiting to have fraud fixed at least since 1935. That is when the biggest fraud in America started. Yet we are still sitting around wondering how fraud gets in to systems like banking and housing. Probably,People have been using other people's SSN that long and yet we still have no law that says it is unlawful to us another person's SSN. Without a fraud proof way of identifying who the customer is there is no way one can trust any thing an applicant says, meaning the fraud goes on.

Fix the fraud and the foreclosure laws will take care of the rest. Do it legally. Not this fraud we have all the way through the system now.

Gmax

I have a hard time calling the signing of an affidavit that is filed with the court that was done rather robotically, fraud. I am not going to get into a legal definition discussion but it appears to me to be ordinary negligence that does not overcome the sad fact that the borrower is in default and should not profit from that fact, especially at my expense.

I would be in favor of Congress waving the legislative wand and declaring as much, and we get back to flushing the deadbeats out and creating a basis where home prices can recover.

Pagar

I'd be in favor of putting the fraudsters in jail and finding honest people to run the system.

Gmax

finding honest people to run the system.

Good point. As long as FNMA and FHLMC exists and have implicit or explicit Govt guarantees, you are going to have a perverse market quite tempting for the kleptocrats in congress from time to time.

So perhaps we should concentrate on putting honest people in Congress ( easier said and than done ) and then cutting the umbilical cord from these huge GSEs. Only then will the invisible hand of Adam Smiths writings, truly be guiding the transaction.

If I thought it would be politically possible I would advocate for removing the deposit guarantees from banks as well. If depositors had to do their diligence before depositing, banks would be a whole lot more prudent to avoid having the franchise lost to a run.

Mad Jack

The problem with buying foreclosed properties now is the concern that a court somewhere will invalidate the foreclosure well after subsequent transfers to subsequent innocent buyers(BFP's). The court decision won't be based on anything so mundane as a finding that the original mortgagor was actually paying the mortgage and was wrongly foreclosed upon. There are in fact no such foreclosed upon innocents. The decision will be based on some "new right" that accrues to someone who actually never put a dime of their own money into a property! Rail at the "banks" all you want but if foreclosed properties cannot be marketed w/o the risk that the foreclosure can be undone well after the fact then the real estate market will flounder for the foreseeable future. That is not a good thing for any of us.

Pagar

"If I thought it would be politically possible I would advocate for removing the deposit guarantees from banks as well".
It might be politically possible to reduce it to a much more logical figure. $250,000 is not needed for the average person, IMO.

Gmax

More cracks in the Dike of the Democrat Party? Its just not fun to lose! Here:

The censure of Rep. Charlie Rangel this week opened up raw wounds within the Democratic Caucus, with members of the Congressional Black Caucus and others angry that fellow Democrats, including several key lieutenants to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), blocked an effort to give him a lesser punishment.

The CBC had been whipping hard on a motion by Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.) to amend the censure resolution to a reprimand for the New York Democrat, and the effort had gained some momentum, particularly when Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) crossed party lines and made an impassioned plea on Rangel's behalf.

Early voting on the measure was nearly even before several top Pelosi lieutenants started to come out against a reprimand, including Democratic Reps. George Miller (Calif.), Anna Eshoo (Calif.) and Steve Israel (N.Y.), Pelosi's pick to chair the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

The final vote wasn't close, and about half of the supporters of the reprimand amendment ultimately voted for censure.

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.), the incoming chairman of the CBC, said people are talking about how Pelosi lieutenants, and Israel in particular, voted. "His vote did not go unnoticed," Cleaver said Friday. "The votes of Mr. Israel and others were not ignored by a number of Members who brought it to my attention on the floor."

There already is "lingering anger for years past, when the DCCC ignored or at best takes CBC members for granted," he said.

Chubby

GMAX

((I have a hard time calling the signing of an affidavit that is filed with the court that was done rather robotically, fraud. I am not going to get into a legal definition discussion but it appears to me to be ordinary negligence that does not overcome the sad fact that the borrower is in default and should not profit from that fact, especially at my expense.

I would be in favor of Congress waving the legislative wand and declaring as much, and we get back to flushing the deadbeats out and creating a basis where home prices can recover))

Chubby

sorry gmax I accidentally posted before adding my response to your posts

I think there's more to the fraud is story than the paper trail. The way officialdom -- government, banks and mortgage companies -- conspired to con the naieve but financially illterate "deadbeats" in the first place is a fraud worthy of B. Madoff imo.

Rick Ballard

Chubby,

David Rosenberg and John Mauldin are both readable and focus on extrapolations which bear some semblance to reality. Mauldin is somewhat stronger on demographic issues and Rosenberg has an excellent eye for non-confirmation wrt econometrics.

Hendry could have presented his entire thesis in 1/10th the space and I saw nothing novel in what he had to say.

Right now, I'm trying to figure out if Mad Ben's QEII+ is actually a cover for the OPM shortage. Treasury has lost about $130 billion in bids from the SS funds due to much more rapid retirement among those 62+. It is also losing about $225 billion in SS rollover due to the jump in benefits paid. I'm trying to determine how much it might be losing in rollover from private (or quasi-private) pension funds due to the same issues.

We can anticipate that BoJ and China will both reduce Treasury purchases as they begin to snack on their seed corn next year and Timmy the Tax Cheat has a new $1,000,000,000,000 spending Jones to cover.

It appears to me that Mad Ben may be printing out of necessity. ZIRP can't be maintained if Treasury is not assured of a source of funds to replace those being lost through attrition.

And, BTW, Trichet has a greater need than Turbo Timmy.

What fun!

jimmyk

The supposedly financially illiterate buyers put up very little of their own money. You don't know how many of them were illiterate and how many actually were just on for the ride hoping to get rich quick with little downside risk (the down side simply being that they lose the house that they didn't risk anything for). Yes, the government is culpable here too for pressuring the banks or greasing the wheels by implicitly backing the loans. But the banks have taken and are taking a hit on this even if they are able to foreclose, it's only a question of how big a hit. I don't feel sorry for the banks, but I'm not shedding tears for most of the borrowers either.

Gmax

There likely were some naive amongst the borrowing base I guess I will have to grant. But at the base, no one stuck a gun to their heads and made them LIE on an affidavit and take the mortgage. It was well within their power to refuse to participate. Most did because they thought that Real Estate only went up in value. Greed made them lie and for those I have no sympathy.

Chubby

((The supposedly financially illiterate buyers put up very little of their own money. You don't know how many of them were illiterate and how many actually were just on for the ride hoping to get rich quick with little downside risk ))

the banks totally threw out traditional, tried and true underwriting policies, under government pressure. How was Joe Wannabe-Homebuyer supposed to know that? You expect to be conned when a guy jumps out from a dark alley trying to sell you a gold watch, but a banker in a suit?

Mad Jack

I looked at all of the foreclosures in one town in my county that occured in a three month period-Jan-Mar 2009. There were 54 properties and of the 54 I could only find 4 where the purchase money mortgage(s) were less than 100% of the purchase price! One person had put down 10% on purchase. 1 had put down 5% and the two remaining had put down less than 2%. The 50 others started out with 100% financing or better. The folks who had 100% financing in the 1999/2000 years had subsequestly refinanced on average three more times and at the end had borrowed about 3 time the original amt. Hard to feel sympathy for the borrowers or the lenders in these cases. Irrational exuberance on both sides!

Pagar

"the banks totally threw out traditional, tried and true underwriting policies, under government pressure."

Obama sued Citibank to force them to make bad loans.

And there are Americans who think we can have the federal government straighten out the housing/loan mess. This is insane.

Chubby

Rick

Thanks very much your for pointing me to some financial writers you respect. I'm quite familiar with Rosenburg but not Mauldin, so I'll definitely check him out. I used to spend almost every hour of every day reading various financial pundits, but got so confused by the many conflicting opinions and analyses, I just stopped. I subscribed to Bob Hoye's newsletter for awhile, because I agree with his basic world view, but I found his newsletter was too loaded with technical jargon to be readable.

I would not be a bit surprised to learn that Bennie is printing cuz he needs to.

You have an odd idea of what "fun" is :)

Threadkiller

Most did because they thought that Real Estate only went up in value.

I wonder who gave them that notion?

The banks needed to increase the bidding pool. All those buyers, qualified or not, drove the price up. The Banks loved it!

Go to a public auto auction to see unqualified bidders at their best.

Now that their Mortgage-stein monster has turned on them, they want to cry foul.

Chubby

Pagar,

Obama was into the "affordable housing" racket up to his eyeballs, and that is why his putting all the blame on Bush for the current financial shipwreck is so detestable. He is lying through his teeth and knows it.

Stephanie

Just a note before I head back out into the cesspool of holiday traffic....

Chubby - I wouldn't be surprised a bit if the Kendonesian commie DOESN'T recognize the cause/effect aspect of his rabble rousing re "fair housing" and redlining. I find that few progs can conceive that their feel goodism could result in anything other than good things. To them good intentions in = good results out regardless of the bodycount in the rearview mirror. It is inconceivable that their actions caused injury - it absolutely has to be faulty execution by others.

Rick Ballard

Chubby,

I had placed the odds on my living to see the collapse of the welfare state below 50%. It is fun to see it coming down like the Berlin Wall. I'll admit, it's roller coaster ride type fun and occasionally I wonder if I'll make through the ride without throwing up but I'm reasonably sure that at the end of the ride we're going to be stronger and more free than at any time in the past 80 years.

Perhaps we'll even learn to actually separate needs from wants.

Chubby

Rick

Seeing things from that perspective, I can understand why you think these are fun times. They are not boring times, that is for sure.

I just read Mauldin's impressive online biography and subscribed to his two free newsletters -- and am wondering how he ever escaped my radar up to now.

miguel cervantes

I don't think he does really know the consequences of his action, a diet of Frank Davis, Derrick Bell, and Jeremiah Wright, could not have prepared him for reality, add
to that Said and Khalidi

Clarice

You look familiar, miguel. That lance and windmill button you're wearing isn't fooling me one bit.

Chubby

Stephanie,

You are probably right but that level of stupidity is hard for me to comprehend. I think they are divided into those who know (the leaders) and those who don't know (the useful idiots). If Obama is a puppet he's a useful idiot, but his teaching Alinsky indicates he knows exactly what he's up to.

narciso lopez

I tried that on another site, a bit of a literary flourish, with a pointed reference
(in Algiers)

Pagar

"Rail at the "banks" all you want but if foreclosed properties cannot be marketed w/o the risk that the foreclosure can be undone well after the fact then the real estate market will flounder for the foreseeable future."

Take the fraud out of the entire chain and the market will come back to the level of what is factual. Millions of workers have lost their jobs and their credit ratings. The workers that could actually be buyers don't have any idea how long they will have a job while we have a government that refuses to give any stability to any thing. The housing market can't do anything but flounder.

The Democrats won't pass a budget. Rep Rangel headed the Tax writing committee. We have a Secretary of the Treasury who couldn't get his own taxes right. The Bush tax cut expiration dates have been known since the laws were written, and yet twenty some days before the year ends, no one knows what the tax rates are going to be. when that date comes. The entire Congress tried to fast track HR 3808 (to take the fraud nationwide) after thousands of affidavits have surfaced that could not have been legally filed in Florida and other states. Then people wonder why the housing market flounders?


Pagar

J.P. Chase has realized that a few of their US customers may not be Anti Christmas.

narciso

True, Pagar, both Kafka and Ionesco are screaming I have a headache, this is beyond
absurd

Gmax

Those of you advocating a foreclosure freeze might want to reflect that Rabbi Lerner is screaming for the same thing:

The basic platform for such a candidate is clear: Unequivocally call for an immediate end to the presence of U.S. troops, advisers and private U.S.-based security firms in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan, and replace the "war on terror" with a Global Marshall Plan that roots homeland security in a strategy of generosity and concern for the well-being of everyone on the planet. Domestically, call for a massive jobs program; a freeze on mortgage foreclosures ; a national bank that would offer interest-free loans to those seeking to create or expand small businesses; immediate implementation of the parts of the Obama health-care plan that would benefit ordinary citizens and build support for a health plan for all citizens; dramatically lower prices for drugs that treat critical diseases such as AIDS and cancer; a strong tax on carbon emissions; and immediate prosecution of those government employees involved in torture or cover-ups to justify the invasion of Iraq. This candidate should push for the media to provide free and equal time to all major candidates for national office as well as for constitutional amendments requiring only public financing in elections and, separately, for corporations to prove every five years to a jury of ordinary citizens that they have a satisfactory history of environmental responsibility (much like the Environmental and Social Responsibility Amendment, or ESRA, advocated by the Network of Spiritual Progressives).

Bold added by me.

Clarice

He's insane. Hillary's favorite "rabbi". Jump aboard his sinking ship while you have a chance.

Pagar

"Those of you advocating a foreclosure freeze"

I'm not sure I've seen any one here advocating for a foreclosure freeze.

Here's an article that pretty well tells you what has to be done to have a lawful foreclosure (in one state at least).

The more meaningful parts are:
"

"The fraud that has come to light are primarily occurring in steps 4, 5, 6 and 7. The verification of the specific data that is mandated legally is not taking place by bank executives. Reviewing a file can take anywhere from, 20 minutes to well over an hour. Yet some bank employees are testifying that they have signed off on as many as 150 per day (Wells Fargo) or 400 per day (Chase).

It is impossible to perform that many foreclosure reviews and data verifications in a single day. The only way this could happen is via a systemic banking fraud that orders its employees to violate the law. Hence, how we end up with the wrong house being foreclosed upon, the wrong person being sued for a mortgage note, a bank without an interest in a mortgage note suing for foreclosure, and cases where more than one note holders are suing on the same property that is being foreclosed.

This is more than mere accident or error, it is willful recklessness. When that recklessness is part of a company’s processes and procedures, it amounts to systemic fraud. (THIS IS CRIMINAL AND SHOULD BE PROSECUTED).

The next step in our cavalcade of illegality is the Notary. Their signature and stamp allows these fraudulent documents to be entered into court as actual evidence (no live witness required). Hence, we have no only fraud, but contempt of court on top of it (BOTH OF WHICH REQUIRE PROSECUTION).

Law firms preparing the legal documents are not doing their job of further verifying the information. And, it seems certain states such as Florida have foreclosure mills who were set up from the outset as fraudulent enterprises. (EVEN MORE PROSECUTION NEEDED).

Lastly, some service processors are not bothering to do their job. This is the last step in the foreclosure proceedings that would put a person on notice of the errors (YET MORE FRAUD).

There are multiple failsafes and checkpoints along the way to insure that this system has zero errors. Indeed, one can argue that the entire system of property rights and contract law has been established over the past two centuries to ensure that this process is error free. There are multiple checks, fail-safes, rechecks, verifications, affirmations, reviews, and attestations that make sure the process does not fail.

It is a legal impossibility for someone without a mortgage to be foreclosed upon. It is a legal impossibility for the wrong house to be foreclosed upon, It is a legal impossibility for the wrong bank to sue for foreclosure.

And yet, all of those things have occurred. The only way these errors could have occurred is if several people involved in the process committed criminal fraud. This is not a case of “Well, something slipped through the cracks.” In order for the process to fail, many people along the chain must commit fraud.

That it is being done for expediency and to save a few dollars on the process is why the full criminal prosecution must occur."

Once the legal steps have been followed, in a lawful manner, the foreclosure should proceed.

The problem right now is that none of the legal requirements are being properly fulfilled. The notes are still back in Countrywide's abandoned safes, The affidates and other lawyer supplied paperwork isn't worth the paper it's lies are printed on, The judges aren't doing what they are supposed to do, etc. etc.

I do not see a single thing in the 08:13 post that I agree with.

Gmax

Its all lawyer BS and you are falling for it. Whether you realize it or not, the chilling effect of screaming for criminal prosecutions for filling of an affidavit that they reviewed a file (when they only scanned it) is a de facto freeze. Horrors somebody signed off on 150 reviews in one day! Lets leave the deadbeat in the House for another two years, while we dither about an affidavit. Merde.

It should not even be a judicial process, foreclosure are handled in over 20 states in a nonjudicial process. Its cheaper and faster. You dont need a judge to foreclose.

sbw

You dont need a judge to foreclose.

Unless it's the law. And once you have broken the law, you don't need a 'Get out of jail free' card just because everyone is doing it.

Gmax

Well if its comforting for yall to sound like the far left, knock yerself out. I have said my piece, and there ain't no backlog in Texas cuz we are smart enough to not put a judicial system in place where its not needed. Strangely, our values for housing have fallen much less here than almost anywhere else in the country. I wonder if there is any correlation?

Good night.

Ignatz

--It is a legal impossibility for someone without a mortgage to be foreclosed upon. It is a legal impossibility for the wrong house to be foreclosed upon, It is a legal impossibility for the wrong bank to sue for foreclosure.--

Perhaps, but those are a very tiny fraction of the foreclosures occurring. In the overwhelming majority the correct entity is foreclosing on the correct delinquent borrower but in some cases the paperwork is inadequate and in some cases may even have been falsified. There already exists a legal method to correct lost or otherwise mishandeled mortgage paperwork and I suspect it will systematically work its way through he courts.
On the MBS side things are considerably more complex and the buyers of the securities may have a case and a recourse, but it would not astonish me that if the banks that packaged the MBSs can adequately reconstruct the paperwork that either a congressional or judicial remedy will be found that keeps the buyers of the MBSs stuck in them.
It's quite possible they won't, as the banks do seem to have violated the terms of the trusts holding them, but I don't think it's some open and shut case, especially with the power the banks wield these days. We shall see.

sbw

I wonder if there is any correlation?

You have given me no reason to suspect there is.

jimmyk

You have given me no reason to suspect there is.

One reason would be that a more rational and sensible legal system, together with more limited government and low taxes and regulation, is good for the economy, and a healthy economy is good for home prices. Whereas places that have lawyers and bureaucrats interfering with and complicating a large part of the economy is probably not so good. But perhaps I am naive.

Melinda Romanoff

Ig-

Precisely my point on the banks, it ain't the foreclosure. It's what it exposed. The fraudulent construction, and sale, of MBS opens too many parties to tax issues that boggle the imagination.

The putbacks are one, then the SEC violations, IRS issues, violations of individual state securities laws, and many others. Add them up, and certain banks can't cover the costs, but they'll pay cash bonuses to top staff, restricted, vesting stock to lesser employees

Stupid by them, but, there it is.

sbw

JimmyK, sometimes one has to act based on the way things are, not the way you'd like them to be.

Chubby

Pagar

((This is more than mere accident or error, it is willful recklessness. When that recklessness is part of a company’s processes and procedures, it amounts to systemic fraud. (THIS IS CRIMINAL AND SHOULD BE PROSECUTED).))

exactly.

no foreclosure freeze + throw the crooks in jail = a "balanced" solution

maryrose

I read an article about a woman in Florida who has had a house in foreclosure for 25 years. The last time she made a mortgage payment was 1985. She is now 71 years old and still fighting the bureaucracy. This is just plain wrong... Article in WSJ.

The Cat Who Walks by Himself.

daddy, cats are the only domesticated animals not demonstrating neoteny.
===============================

If it cools, our lives will be nasty, brutish, short and free.  If it warms our lives will be nasty, brutish, short and enslaved.

Heh, Hit. We are cooling, folks; for how long even Dellers doesn't know. I liked that he hit on the Pacific Decadal Oscillations, the sunspots and the augered Maunder Minimum.
================================

Sancho.

'Pointed reference'. Ha Ha, I get it.
====================

narciso

No actually I meant imprisoned in Algiers by the Turks, after Lepanto

daddy

Kim,

On Neotony in Cats. Grandin says the following:

"No one knows for sure when wild cats started to evolve into domestic cats. The oldest cat remains found in the grave of a human are 9,500 years old...That was after agriculture was invented...so humans were past the hunter/gatherer stage. They were living in towns and villages when they started to associate with cats. The most popular theory of how cats became domestic animals is that they joined human settlements to prey on rats and mice. Basically they made themselves into pets."

"This theory may not be right. though....But even if cats and people have lived together for thousands and thousands of years, cats probably haven't been changed that much by their association with people because cats and humans had a mutualistic relationship instead of the more symbiotic relationship humans and dogs had during domestication. Early humans needed their dogs to guard their camps and help them hunt, and early dogs needed their humans for food and shelter They depended on each other. With people and cats, it was more a relationship of convenience. Cats killed mice and rats, and humans provided lots of mice and rats to kill since mice and rats live in human settlements. The two species didn't need each other so much as profit by being around each other."

"The result was that today a housecat is a lot closer to a wild cat than a dog is to a wolf...Cats would have had less selection pressure to lose their fear of humans than wolves did, partly because the African wild cat, which is the ancestor of the domestic cat, has a lot less fear of humans than wolves do...The African cat didn't have to change very much to be willing to live as a housecat."

"Cats did change in some ways. All domestic animals have smaller brains then their wild ancestor animals, and domestic cats also have smaller brains that wild cats although we don't know very much about the differences at this point. Domestic animals also undergo pedomorphosis, or neotony, and adult housecats have three juvenile behaviors: meowing, purring, and kneading their paws. Adult wild cats living in zoos don't do those things with humans, although they do purr with other cats. Other than that, though, cats are less neotonized than other domestic animals, and they can easily go feral and survive. That's not true for dogs. If you put the family poodle out in the countryside, his chances of surviving are low unless he finds another family to live with. But abandoned cats do fine. They're healthier living with people because they get veterinary care, but they don't need to find another family to survive. They are still adapted to living in the wild and taking care of themselves."

Thought that was interesting.

macphisto

the senior of our three cats appeared in the trees at the edge of our lot one day back in 2004. a neighbor said he may have been abandoned by someone who'd lived nearby months earlier, but we have no way of knowing. in any case, he would appear to have done well enough as a semi-wild kitty...he was dirty and rangy when he decided to be part of our family, but not skinny, and we live in a semi-rural where pets regularly disappear to the mountain lions that are just out of sight in the Santa Cruz Mountains, and which people sometimes see grabbing Little Fluffy Foo Foo out of their yard when she goes out for a pee. and he clearly possessed the tools to survive, because he brought us dead rats to seal the implicit contract. he chose to be our cat...he didn't need to be. we had to convince him, really.

macphisto

we live in a semi-rural area. that's what i get for posting sans coffee. Coca-Cola is not a substitute.

daddy

Neat story macphisto. Thanks for that.

cathyf

Every cat I've ever had has been a rescue. I'm still not totally reconciled to being a cat owner, although I have three. Ok, I'm not really an owner. Dogs have owners; cats have staff.

Chubby

cathyf ... you nailed it on cats and dogs lol!

After I "inherited" my mother's indoor cat who was going to be put down, it took me a long time to reconcile to being a cat owner. The major turning point was when I learned how to properly keep the litter box clean (via some You Tubes) Before that, the cat-poo box was not an endearing feature. It still isn't but at least now it's under control.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame