Housing market, economy still deep in a post-binge hangover
Yesterday’s housing news — a July decline of 27 percent in sales of existing housing, about twice as deep as predicted — added to the sense that the economic recovery has stalled. A big part of the decline can be explained by the fact that federal tax subsidies for homebuyers ended in June. People who wanted or needed to buy a home had jumped into the market earlier, while the $8,000 tax credit was still in effect, leaving demand in July to collapse.
The fact that housing prices nonetheless rose slightly last month over a year ago, suggesting that the prices being demanded by sellers still have not come into balance with the prices that buyers are willing to pay.
(On a side note, the Christian Science Monitor has identified six cities in which housing prices are actually rising. Atlanta is not among them. In the healthiest housing market in the country, median prices actually rose 17 percent in the second quarter of 2010 compared to a year earlier. So load up your U-Haul, folks, and shuffle off to Buffalo, NY!)
Realistically, there’s not much that anybody can do to reverse the national trend. The well-intended housing credit, for example, did little more than delay the necessary correction between supply and demand. We are experiencing the inevitably painful hangover that follows a major housing binge, a disaster created by a combination of greed, corruption, bad government policies and willful, eager ignorance by almost every party involved, as the chart below illustrates.
H/T The Big Picture (http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/)
Also yesterday, the Congressional Budget Office released its latest, legally mandated estimate of the effect of the Obama stimulus package on the economy through the second quarter of 2010. As bad as things are, the CBO found, they would be a lot worse without the stimulus.
According to the CBO, the stimulus package:
Raised the level of real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product (GDP) by between 1.7 percent and 4.5 percent, Lowered the unemployment rate by between 0.7 percentage points and 1.8 percentage points, Increased the number of people employed by between 1.4 million and 3.3 million, Increased the number of full-time-equivalent (FTE) jobs by 2.0 million to 4.8 million compared with what those amounts would have been otherwise. (Increases in FTE jobs include shifts from part-time to full-time work or overtime and are thus generally larger than increases in the number of employed workers.)
The CBO also updated its estimate of the stimulus package’s impact on the debt, estimating that it will add $819 billion through 2019. For comparison’s sake, another CBO estimate last week put the cost of the Iraq War at $700 billion between 2003 and 2010, a number that does not include interest costs.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
472 comments Add your comment
Saul Good
August 25th, 2010
10:45 am
Bruno@10:25am… At this same time in Reagan’s first term…he was dealing with the same bad poll numbers that Obama is dealing with. Almost exactly the same. As far as bringing Dubya into the equation… the recession he was handed with the keys to the WH does not even equate with what Reagan was handed…and when it comes down to what Obama was handed, it’s off the charts. He DID have a surplus handed to him. Bush’s “positive leadership” came unfortunately from his having to deal with 9-11 and then squandering it in the end with the failed wars he sold to a fearful nation. Reagan was certainly winning no “popularity” contests at the 1 1/2 year mark in his first term. If he was…the polls showed that his “leadership” skills had yet to kick in. In time his ratings improved…time will tell for Obama as well. Yet like ALL economies that have peaks and valley’s… when we start heading up hill after plugging the leaks (and YES the Stock Market is WAY up)…and jobs start to be created… we’ll be able to see how “effective” as a “leader” Obama is. One thing you can’t take away from him is that he said he’d do something about Health Care (like many before him)…and he did. That does not mean you have to agree with it…but he DID in fact get it passed. Bush had a majority in both houses and never even tackled it. Never even tried to…yet from day one in office… our insurance rates went up and up and up. I”m not going back in time to blame him here..I’m just pointing out the “leadership” skills you spoke of up above in your post. Obama was handed much on his plate…the WORST economy in modern times. I’m saddened by all of those who thought it could have EVER been an easy fix. As a mathematician maybe you can explain the “odds” for a quick fix ever happening with ANYONE who would have been in office at this time. I highly doubt the economy would be any better right now with McCain as Prez…. highly.
Bruno
August 25th, 2010
10:45 am
“I do remember Ross Perot saying that if NAFTA passed that whissing sound you’re hearing is jobs leaving America.It’s simple. Manufacturing jobs go where the labor costs are cheapest if there are no tariffs on imported goods that means anywhere but the USA.”
Thin Guy–I voted for Ross Perot twice, even after it became apparent that he had a loose screw or two. My thinking back then, and now, is that we need someone with business experience leading the parade, not a career lawyer or politician. In my book, Obama was the worst possible choice last November.
Having said that, tariffs aren’t the answer. As another blogger pointed out a few months ago, they help no one, and the “winner” is the one it hurts the least.
USinUK
August 25th, 2010
10:45 am
“while bank leverage and credit derivatives were a real problem, but still a bit of a sideshow”
ah. no. it was the derivative market that took what could have been a limited bonfire that ended at the water’s edge and turned it into a global economic apocalypse.
Palin fan
August 25th, 2010
10:46 am
This is more proof that Obama’s socilist centralized economic planning has ruined the economy in only 18 months.
Hey liberals, aren’t you regretting your sad vote for Obama?
USinUK
August 25th, 2010
10:46 am
Bruno – 10:45 – do you still miss his charts?
@@
August 25th, 2010
10:46 am
jt’s right!
Government was the problem on this one. Stupid DC and federal policies created this disaster by building the crumbly foundation upon which to expand home ownership.
The liberal in me said it was the right thing to do. I was wrong!
StJ
August 25th, 2010
10:46 am
“As bad as things are, the CBO found, they would be a lot worse without the stimulus.”
Legally mandated or not, we now use numbers created out of thin air as “proof” of whether something “worked” or not.
News flash: the housing market isn’t “coming back” until jobs do. And according to Joe Biden, 8 million of those jobs are gone forever.
We wouldn’t be in this pickle if we had decided to remain self-sufficient. (But that would have been too hard.) Instead, we buy trillions of dollars worth of stuff from countries that don’t even respect basic human rights, while our citizens with job skills sit unemployed. (How’s that for “free trade”?)
Now we wonder where the jobs went, why the economy is in the toilet (and likely to stay there), why the trade deficit and national debt are so high, and why most of our Treasury notes are held by a Communist country with ulterior and sinister motives.
Talk about selling your soul…
David S
August 25th, 2010
10:47 am
What people don’t understand, and probably never will, is that the recession/depression, are critically necessary to clear out the bad debt and high prices. In the crisis of 1920-21, Warren Harding let the markets correct themselves. Despite economic numbers that were worse than the numbers at the beginning of the Depression, the economy corrected itself and took off on a sound footing. All the stupid Keynesian economic measures that Bush and Obama have taken (much like the stupid Keynesian measures that Hoover and FDR took back in 1929-1944) are only preventing the bad debt from being liquidated, the prices from falling to appropriate levels, the unsupportable business, banks, and others from going bankrupt, and the economy from getting back to a sound footing. Instead they are prolonging the misery while bailing out their friends. They are essentially reinflating the bubble with worthless money and debt. When the real collapse comes – and it will – the fall will be even greater and the misery and suffering far more profound than if they had just let the problem work itself out.
By the way, I am only saying the same things that the Austrians (the intelligent economists) have been saying since the first Depression. They have been proven right with every bubble and recession and they will be proven right again. http://www.mises.org if you would like to get a sound education in correct and sound economic principles.
USinUK
August 25th, 2010
10:47 am
“ruined the economy”
yeah. because it was in such STELLAR shape in January 20, 2009.
stop. my sides. you’re killing me.
thomas
August 25th, 2010
10:48 am
So we are touting this as a sucess?
Do the math!
with the best estimates of creating( a person getting a job who had none) jobs is at 3.3 million.
that cost us 819 billion….
So hooray, we spent $248,181.82 per job!!!!!!
how many of ya”ll out there make $248,181.82 a year?
Those must have been some really dangerous or highly skilled jobs to demand $248,181.82.
If you think that is a sucess i bet you also did really well in personal finance or any college level business course.
getalife
August 25th, 2010
10:48 am
Yes, if you are religious radical extremists, Obama will get you.
Look out wingnuts.
Brad Steel
August 25th, 2010
10:48 am
For major MSAa, is it true that Atlanta is the biggest year-over-year housing loser at -17.4%?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/24/8-cities-where-housing-pr_n_692631.html
Harry Callahan
August 25th, 2010
10:48 am
Liberals are so funny…a bunch of moron bankers lent money to another bunch of morons who bought houses they couldn’t afford, and the cause of the problem was, according to liberals;
A) Tax cuts for the rich
B) The war in Iraq
C) Sarah Palin
D) Free market health care
LMAO at you idiots!
Dusty
August 25th, 2010
10:48 am
Normal,
If the government puts all these men to work again as you suggested, whom do you think will be paying them? The Feds? You mean “us” as in”taxpayers”. More “stimulus”? More debt?
I think it is about time that people recognize one meaning of independence is taking care of themselves and not depending on others. . When did we lose the meaning of independence?
USinUK
August 25th, 2010
10:50 am
“Neo-Cons are so funny…they think that the entire economic death spiral was caused by a bunch of moron bankers lent money to another bunch of morons who bought houses they couldn’t afford”
Scout
August 25th, 2010
10:50 am
Anyone listen to Boortz this morning about what some of “your” tax money is going for?
Rightwing Troll
August 25th, 2010
10:50 am
Still pretending that these wars are about “freedom” huh? Whatever gets you through the night as our boys die I suppose… When will those WMD’s be found?
barking frog
August 25th, 2010
10:51 am
The chart indicates that for every individual that
bought a house in 2004, 2005 and 2006 some
individual no longer owns a house in 2007.
The houses are still there so evidently a
non-individual owns the house. Are they
rented, vacant, demolished(land still there)?
The former owners are living somewhere and
paying rent or living with relatives or homeless.
No economic drain anywhere. It wasn’t people
who panicked this depression, It was the banks.
Saul Good
August 25th, 2010
10:51 am
Normal@10:39 am
And did you happen to read yesterday about how the cities in North Fulton want to deal with transportation woes… It’s their first “stab” at creating a Milton County… yet all they want to invest in is added lanes to existing roads. That should have been done when the economy was ROCKIN’…they had the $$$ back then to do so. Yet nothing to bring the other means of transportation…from more bus routes to trains. Someone needs to take them to Greenwich CT on a weekday morning so they can witness the multi-millionaires getting on Metro North and taking the train to work.
Joe Biden
August 25th, 2010
10:51 am
Let me be clear…hairplugs cause delusion, and that’s a big f**kin deal.
Rightwing Troll
August 25th, 2010
10:52 am
Why listen to a windbag like boortz when I can come here and get the “cliff’s notes” talking points version from the local hate baggers?
Bruno
August 25th, 2010
10:52 am
“At this same time in Reagan’s first term…he was dealing with the same bad poll numbers that Obama is dealing with.”
Saul, Poll numbers are the least of my concerns. Putting aside comparisons of which recessions were worse upon taking office (and yes, Bush was facing a recession in Jan, 2001 following the tech bubble bursting), the difference between Reagan, Bush and Obama can be summed up in one word: leadership. Obama promised his main focus would be the economy, then he turned around and enacted three major pieces of legislation which have had a dampering effect on business. I even thought his talk of “keeping his boot on the throat of BP” showed a tremendous lack of maturity and good judgment.
As far “doing something about health care”, he certainly did–unfortunately it was the worst possible solution to what ails our system–high prices caused by the over-reliance on the third-party billing system.
StJ
August 25th, 2010
10:53 am
E) Richard Nixon
F) Ronald Reagan
G) The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
H) Christianity
I) Rush Limbaugh
J) Sean Hannity
K) Jock itch
John
August 25th, 2010
10:53 am
It’s all Bush’s fault!! Come on 2012. Hopefully, we can get this Muslim out of office before he tears America down.
Kamchak
August 25th, 2010
10:54 am
But I do remember Ross Perot saying that if NAFTA passed that whissing sound you’re hearing is jobs leaving America.
That “giant whissing sound” began some 15-20 years earlier when our leaders threw the manufacturing base under the bus while deciding on an industrial policy.
By the mid-1970s, cracks in the American industrial base were already visible. For the first time in the 20th century, the United States began running trade deficits. Factory closings that had earlier been limited to apparel, shoes, and plastic toys spread to steel, small appliances, and auto parts. And the decision by the Arab states to control oil prices signaled that the era of cheap energy that had fueled American manufacturing was coming to an end.
It was more about the growing price of energy. And as an added bonus a chance to marginalize the political influence of organized labor.
Granny Godzilla
August 25th, 2010
10:54 am
thomas
“$248,181.82 per job”
you fell for that one?
StJ
August 25th, 2010
10:55 am
“It’s all Bush’s fault!!”
Oops, reminds me…forgot one
L) George Bush
Normal
August 25th, 2010
10:55 am
Dusty
August 25th, 2010
10:48 am
Of course. We share the good times, we share the bad times. It worked before and it will work again.
The CBO
August 25th, 2010
10:55 am
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
CBO revises the cost of ObamaCare … $115 billion upwards
Just a little more proof that the Democrats snookered us on ObamaCare.
Politico: Congressional Budget Office estimates released Tuesday predict the health care overhaul will likely cost about $115 billion more in discretionary spending over ten years than the original cost projections.
USinUK
August 25th, 2010
10:56 am
could someone please hand John 10:53 his sign?
kthx
Normal
August 25th, 2010
10:56 am
And Dusty,
“I think it is about time that people recognize one meaning of independence is taking care of themselves and not depending on others. . When did we lose the meaning of independence?”
How do you propose to do that if there are no jobs? Rob banks?
Saul Good
August 25th, 2010
10:56 am
Scout…you mean Boortz is taking a break from talking about his friggin’ plane? If Neil has a “plan” to fix the economy…tell him to run for office and stop ridiculing those IN office. It’s an easy job he has…yet “no real world experience” in fixing the economy. Just another talking bobble head who complains and points fingers while not ever having the “balls” to put himself in the shoes of those he rants on and complains about.
getalife
August 25th, 2010
10:57 am
cons have egg on their faces but ignore their ideology has failed.
They want power back and their failed party has no plans.
The only plan they have cons is finishing off our country so tell us why your party deserves your vote.
Do you want a total collapse?
USinUK
August 25th, 2010
10:58 am
Normal – 10:56 – doncha know, there ARE jobs, but people don’t want to work since they’re getting rich on unemployment benefits.
ken R
August 25th, 2010
10:58 am
Even Letterman wants him out, lol
Wow! 6 cities out of around 20,000 have housing prices on the upswing, lets rejoice! The CBO is a jokke and everyone knows it.
Unemployment is at 9.5% so how can they say it’s getting better? DUH!
Harry Callahan
August 25th, 2010
10:58 am
A free Econ 101 lesson for the libs…The demand for housing (and therefore prices) were driven up artificially by the government (Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac) guaranteeing loans for people that had no business buying houses in the first place, and/or people buying bigger and more expensive houses than they should have. Unless someone comes up with a way to re-introduce this ARTIFICAL demand, prices aren’t coming back up. And that’s a good thing, because housing needs to be affordable. But now we’re moving into Lesson #2, which most of you aren’t intellectually ready to tackle yet, but I’ll give you a teaser…your primary residence is an EXPENSE, not an investment, and rising home prices don’t do anything but drive up the cost of taxes, insurance, and everything else associated with home ownership.
Rightwing Troll
August 25th, 2010
10:59 am
Enter your comments here
Normal
August 25th, 2010
10:59 am
Saul Good
August 25th, 2010
10:51 am
Saul,
I hear you. I’ve been on that train…love the Bar…
barking frog
August 25th, 2010
10:59 am
John 10:53 entire blog,capsule form. excellent.
Jonathan
August 25th, 2010
10:59 am
The private sector creates a new job with 10-50k of capital. That’s ok- keep believing the gov’t is the best path to economic salvation.
Normal
August 25th, 2010
11:00 am
USinUK
August 25th, 2010
10:58 am
Bruno
August 25th, 2010
11:00 am
“All the stupid Keynesian economic measures that Bush and Obama have taken (much like the stupid Keynesian measures that Hoover and FDR took back in 1929-1944) are only preventing the bad debt from being liquidated, the prices from falling to appropriate levels, the unsupportable business, banks, and others from going bankrupt, and the economy from getting back to a sound footing.
David S–You’re preaching to the choir here. It’s beyond me why some folks (yes, you USinUK, me luv) think that more Keynesian “stimulus” is what we need following 8 years of it from Bush. Pay me now or pay me later–except later is going to cost us three times as much.
interested observer
August 25th, 2010
11:00 am
How about some figures on what America’s biggest economic stimulus program — the defense budget — did for the country? If not that, then can’t someone actually break defense spending down into its three prime components: actual defense of this country, implementation of foreign policy and economic stimulus?
Paul
August 25th, 2010
11:00 am
Welcome Back, Jay.
Housing’s gonna be tough for a long time, along with all those who make their living from it. Maybe now people will look at a house as a place to live and not as a means to make a fast buck. Except securities firms, of course. I’m sure they’ve already identified ways to that which is not specifically prohibited.
As far as the stimulus, yeah, it’s better than it would have been, but I think what has people riled up is, do they think they got their money’s worth? Remember, when Pres Obama first proposed his mix of spending and tax cuts, Republican numbers where a whole lot closer than what Democrats came up with. Then the immediate pain passed and people looked at the price tag and people said “wow, did it have to cost THAT much?!!?” Added to that the perception Democrats took other legislation and played Santa Clause, doling out huge sums, above that which was necessary, and that’s why I think Democrats have a perception problem with many voters.
Bosch 9:54
[[GWB,
“Y’all miss me yet?”
Hell no.]]
Did you know oatmeal leaves an oily-like residue when it gets spewed onto a monitor?
Scout
August 25th, 2010
11:00 am
Saul Good:
I don’t like some of Boortz’s views either especially on abortion.
However, how do you like you tax money going to repair a minaret on a mosque in Nigeria ?
Rightwing Troll
August 25th, 2010
11:01 am
I think Scout and his hate baggers hate the military. They’re the ones who lied and sent our boys off to die. Now instead of actually doing anything to help remedy that, they spend thier days trolling libural blogs…
@@
August 25th, 2010
11:01 am
It never ceases to amaze me…with the U.S. economy collapsing around us, jay’s left-wingers are in competition to see whose post ranks cutest.
@@
August 25th, 2010
11:02 am
…that’s when they’re not revisiting the past to justify the present.
Granny Godzilla
August 25th, 2010
11:02 am
The CBO
August 25th, 2010
10:55 am
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
CBO revises the cost of ObamaCare … $115 billion upwards
you fell for that one?…..OMG what a morning….
Rightwing Troll
August 25th, 2010
11:03 am
Anybody ever come up a single solitary new and original idea that has come out of the hate baggers movement?
Southern Comfort
August 25th, 2010
11:03 am
Harry
Which morons? The CRA morons? The McMansion on McDonald’s salary morons? or these morons?
There’s so many to blame and so little time…..
Jimmy62
August 25th, 2010
11:03 am
Unfortunately all the CBO does is make estimates based on what the bill says. So if the stimulus bill said it would spend $X per job saved, then the CBO sees how many dollars the stimulus spent on jobs, divides that by the $X/job estimate in the bill, and says that’s how many jobs were saved. That’s not the same as examining the results, and really is pretty much meaningless. What is not meaningless is that the unemployment rate shows no sign of getting better.
What’s the very opposite of meaningless is that even Bookman admits the housing market was only temporarily boosted by various spending measures, and that there is a bigger crash now than there would have been had people not been bribed to buy homes. The same thing was seen with Cash for Clunkers, where the fall in demand following the end of the program was approximately equal to the rise in demand during the program. The net result was a lot of government spending for the same volume of car sales that would have occurred without the spending.
The stimulus cannot avoid the same result, because it’s run on the same theory. Bribe people to keep the economy going, and they will. Stop bribing them, and they will do less than they would have had they not been bribed in the first place. Unfortunately in the interim we flushed near a trillion dollars down the toilet for no net positive result.
Paul
August 25th, 2010
11:03 am
interested observer
Last time I checked, weapons sales were our largest export.
You don’t wanna put all those defense workers (probably have some in your district) out of work, do ya?
USinUK
August 25th, 2010
11:04 am
“The demand for housing (and therefore prices) were driven up artificially by the government (Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac) guaranteeing loans for people that had no business buying houses in the first place, and/or people buying bigger and more expensive houses than they should have”
right. it was all F&F, it had nothing to do with the fact that the demand for MBS was through the frickin’ ROOF (no pun intended), which drove banks to make more loans since they could make money by selling the mortgage to a company who would roll it up, relabel it AAA and have some schmuck buy it as part of their hedge fund portfolio.
not to mention, could someone please remind these numpties that the majority of subprime mortgages were NOT made by banks???!!!
Harry Callahan
August 25th, 2010
11:04 am
Meanwhile, back on the ranch, left-leaning NYTimes/CBS News commisions a survey that finds Tea Party supporters to be wealthier and more highly educated on average than the general population. Normal, USinUK, Granny Godzilla, and Kamchak are so befuddled by this contradiction to their understanding of the universe that they spend the remainder of the day locked in their trailers, lying on the floor in a fetal position and praying to their Lord and Savior Barack The Messiah…
“Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us/politics/15poll.html
thomas
August 25th, 2010
11:04 am
Granny Godzilla
August 25th, 2010
10:54 am
Are you saying that the average per job spent is not $248,181.82?
How so?
we are spending $819,000,000,000, in 2 years there has been 3,300,000 jobs created……. 819,000,000,000/3,300,000 =248,181.82
So for every job created it has cost us $248,181,82
I am sorry that math is a difficult subject for you but there are calculators that can assist you. All the information is at the top up there in Bookman’s piece.
Again sorry if you do not like the facts but that is them and it has cost us $248,181.82 for every single job created.
GREAT! jobs the gov. is creating these days
USinUK
August 25th, 2010
11:05 am
“jay’s left-wingers are in competition to see whose post ranks cutest”
we’re all trying to be juuuuuuuuuust like yeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwww @@
Rightwing Troll
August 25th, 2010
11:05 am
“@@
August 25th, 2010
11:02 am
…that’s when they’re not revisiting the past to justify the present.”
So, what’s worse? Leftists revisiting the past to justify the present? Or hate baggers revisiting the past for thier ideas and to make excuses for their hand in the present?
@@
August 25th, 2010
11:06 am
Capital One Bank Releases Results of its National Small Business Barometer Survey
Spending and Investments
Despite reporting improved or steady finances, most U.S. small businesses polled plan to hold off on additional business development and investment spending in the near-term. Well over half (60 percent) of small businesses say they plan to keep business development and investment spending at current levels for the next six months. One-in-five (21 percent) small businesses in the survey plan to increase investment spending while only 16 percent say they plan to decrease spending. Small firms are also cautious about hiring plans. Only 26 percent of small business owners surveyed say they plan to add employees to the payroll over the next six months, down 6 percentage points since last quarter but consistent with results throughout 2009. Correspondingly, the percentage of small businesses planning to hold off on hiring over the next six months jumped from 62 percent last quarter to 67 percent this quarter.
Just as we, bloggers, react to one another’s posts, business will react to Obama’s economic policies. They ARE entitled for now. When that day comes, that they ARE NOT…we will be under a socialist/communist regime.
Bruno
August 25th, 2010
11:07 am
Well, I’m either a genius or an idiot for re-buying CSCO a few minutes ago.
Any votes on that?
P.S. to Jay–Thanks for running a column this AM on the economy as I beseeched you last night. Maybe you already had it in the works, so I won’t take any of the credit for the suggestion. Good job everyone for the great input. Maybe all we can do is hang on for dear life right now, but at least we’re doing it together.
@@
August 25th, 2010
11:08 am
Rightwing Troll:
I was opposed to Bush’s TARP, and I’m opposed to Obama’s stimulus.
Have I made my position clear enough for you? The majority of Americans are opposed to excessive government spending. That’s why the Republicans were given the boot in 2006.
Dusty
August 25th, 2010
11:09 am
My goodness,
Liberals are running all over history looking for someone to blame for US economy woes. Kamchak is back in the 70s. There is the usual upchuck over Reagan. Then it’s energy. USinUK convulses into six smiley faces because SHE KNOWS it was Bush. Ho ho ho….
It seems liberals forget that the guy at the top takes the blame. Shhhhhhh don’t mention Obama. and CHANGE and all that good stuff liberals said we’d get with their Santa Claus president.
So we get it and it is NOT good! Yep, I’ll answer the question. I MISS BUSH and all his honesty.
Saul Good
August 25th, 2010
11:09 am
Bruno… we’ll just have to “agree” to “disagree” about leadership. I guess we just see things differently at times. The bubble burst of the stock market deflated lots of over-inflated BS companies…I was in the market then, just like I’m still in it now (and yes, I have CSCO which I purchased for $19 a share many years ago..and then dollar-cost averaged with more shares when it was down to $10 a share)… no plans on selling it at any time in the near future. It’s a “keeper” in my portfolio. Peaks and Valley’s…I’m in for the long haul.
As far as “leadership” goes… I see Obama as being just as strong a leader as Reagan…because when the economy turns around (as it will…as ALL of them have in the past)… it will be HE who will be able to take credit for it)… Like I said… Reagan was just as unpopular back in the same part of his first term…and there are those who think his face should be on our currency… Time will tell my friend… time WILL tell. Not much we can do but live our lives and wait it out………….. so simply I’ll choose to keep living….
Granny Godzilla
August 25th, 2010
11:09 am
oh thomas
what did those jobs do? build a bridge maybe? build a school?
where did the money for the steel and brick and mortar and electrical
wire and those teeny tiny kindergarten desks come from?
you can’t divide the cost per project by number of jobs created to get a honest number (I don’t think you want an honest number, but you’ll have to deal with your own karma).
Kamchak
August 25th, 2010
11:09 am
not to mention, could someone please remind these numpties that the majority of subprime mortgages were NOT made by banks???!!!
Sure.
Federal Reserve Board data show that:
* More than 84 percent of the subprime mortgages in 2006 were issued by private lending institutions.
* Private firms made nearly 83 percent of the subprime loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers that year.
* Only one of the top 25 subprime lenders in 2006 was directly subject to the housing law that’s being lambasted by conservative critics.
Normal
August 25th, 2010
11:10 am
Actually, I’ve been debating on if I should invest in a couple of houses now that the market is glutted. It would fit my sorta warped sense of humor to rent a house in a good neighborhood to a passle of Hispanics…maybe down in Clayton County…
thomas
August 25th, 2010
11:10 am
USinUK
August 25th, 2010
10:58 am
Do you honestly think there are not those out there who would exploit that option and do you not also think there are those who already have and continue to do so?
Its dishonest to make any blanket statement claiming that is what people on unemployment do…. however just as dihonest to claim that there are not some who would and have done that.
SOUTHERN ATL
August 25th, 2010
11:11 am
As some complain about what Obama has done to the country, look at what Sonny Perdue and the Republican Party has done to this “great state”….If there is not a large “DEMOCRATIC” turnout, we will be on the same path with Nathan Deal…Georgia the time is NOW if we want to turn this state around!!
RW-(the original)
August 25th, 2010
11:11 am
there has been 3,300,000 jobs created
thomas,
If you go to the linked report it shows jobs created as anywhere from 1.4 million to 3.3 million. You’re giving them a huge benefit of the doubt by using the top end number.
USinUK
August 25th, 2010
11:11 am
“USinUK convulses into six smiley faces because SHE KNOWS it was Bush. Ho ho ho”
yeah. well. reading comprehension never was your strong suit.
I didn’t say it was anyone’s fault. I was laughing at the idea that Obama destroyed the economy – like it was in such great shakes when he got here.
nice try, Miss Reading is Fundamental.
thomas
August 25th, 2010
11:11 am
Normal
August 25th, 2010
11:10 am
Thats illegal,
if you are saying you would give any preference to anybody based on ethnicity or race to rent from you!
Normal
August 25th, 2010
11:12 am
Scout
August 25th, 2010
11:00 am
What if it was a Church steeple?
Bruno
August 25th, 2010
11:12 am
“The stimulus cannot avoid the same result, because it’s run on the same theory. Bribe people to keep the economy going, and they will. Stop bribing them, and they will do less than they would have had they not been bribed in the first place. Unfortunately in the interim we flushed near a trillion dollars down the toilet for no net positive result.”
Preach it, Jimmy62!!
You listening, USinUK??
getalife
August 25th, 2010
11:12 am
“Morgan Stanley Says Government Defaults Inevitable”Bloomberg.
Well, the gop need a new plan because their plan to destroy America is accomplished.
Saul Good
August 25th, 2010
11:13 am
Hold on…Dusty, Bush was HONEST?
If so…feel free to explain the IMMEDIATE THREAT that Saddam and Iraq were to the US (oh and those pesky WMD’s he claimed Saddam had stockpiles of)… yup. That’s honesty at it’s BEST. Most of all…explain it to all that lost their lives because of his HONESTY…both our Troops and the countless innocent lives that perished because of his “honesty”….
Fly-On-The-Wall
August 25th, 2010
11:13 am
I somehow doubt that we’ll be putting the ‘adults’ in charge after November 2nd as 90%+ of incumbents are winning their primaries. So much for the ’sweep them out’ attitude.
Keep up the good fight!
August 25th, 2010
11:14 am
Got a great email this morning. Time to stop Fox Fox is bad news for America! Stop it! You can even report local businesses that run Fox and have them asked to turn it off.
@@
August 25th, 2010
11:14 am
Bruno:
P.S. to Jay–Thanks for running a column this AM on the economy as I beseeched you last night. Maybe you already had it in the works, so I won’t take any of the credit for the suggestion.
God luv ‘ya! You just can’t see the forest, ’cause your ego’s in the way.
Normal
August 25th, 2010
11:14 am
thomas
August 25th, 2010
11:11 am
I think the law says that as long as they can pay, they can live there, and as a landlord, I will become a good Republican and go for the money first.
USinUK
August 25th, 2010
11:14 am
thomas – have you ever been on unemployment?
@@
August 25th, 2010
11:15 am
Last paragraph.
Slouchers! Ten-hut!!!!!!!
I'm here from the Government and I'm here to help!
August 25th, 2010
11:16 am
HISTORY LESSON – YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY CARD
Just in case some of you young whippersnappers (& some older ones) didn’t know this. It’s easy to check out, if you don’t believe it. Be sure and show it to your kids. They need a little history lesson on what’s what and it doesn’t matter whether you are Democrat or Republican. Facts are Facts!!!
Social Security Cards up until the 1980s expressly stated the number and card were not to be used for identification purposes. Since nearly everyone in the United States now has a number, it became convenient to use it anyway and the message was removed.
An old Social Security card with the “NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION” message.
Our Social Security
Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:
1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary,
No longer Voluntary
2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the Program,
Now 7.65% on the first $90,000
3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year,
No longer tax deductible
4.) That the money the participants put into the independent ‘Trust Fund’ rather than into the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security
Retirement Program, and no other Government program, and,
Under Johnson the money was moved to the General Fund and Spent
5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.
Under Clinton &Gore up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed
Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month — and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to ‘put away’ — you may be interested in the following:
———— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— —-
Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent ‘Trust Fund’ and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?
A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democrat controlled House and Senate.
———— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— —
Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?
A: The Democrat Party.
———— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— —–
Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?
A: The Democrat Party, with Al Gore casting the ‘tie-breaking’ deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the US
———— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— ——— –
Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?
AND MY FAVORITE:
A: That’s right!
Jimmy Carter and the Democrat Party. Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! The Democrat Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it!
———— — ———— ——— —– ———— ——— ———
Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!
And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it! If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and maybe changes will evolve. Maybe not, some Democrats are awfully sure of what isn’t so.
Saul Good
August 25th, 2010
11:17 am
@@: “…we will be under a socialist/communist regime.”
Truly… I thought you were WAY more in touch then to go THAT route…
Really? I mean REALLY @@???
Bruno
August 25th, 2010
11:17 am
“Bruno… we’ll just have to “agree” to “disagree” about leadership. I guess we just see things differently at times.”
No problem, Saul. I gave up on demanding that the rest of the world see things my way a long time ago.
harvey
August 25th, 2010
11:17 am
this nation is in crisis. Seniors are looking a rising taxes, and even with paid off homes, their life savings now eroding daily will never be able to keep up with the property taxes. And Obama sends $6 Million borrowed dollars to refurbish foreign mosques. Why is he still President?
Dusty
August 25th, 2010
11:19 am
Bruno,
I see you are taking credit for this morning’s subject. Did you tell Jay to blame is on something before Obama’s reign?
Perhaps you should blog on the business page with your business projections. Nobody else seems to know what is going on. I judge this on many factors. I also looked at my new health insurance costs and it is high enough to make one convulse. The government dabbles while citizens burn and smoke rises..
I'm here from the Government and I'm here to help!
August 25th, 2010
11:19 am
USinUK
Only thing you have shown is your flavor of KOOK-aid! Maybe instead of ICE to help the taste you show HEAT it.. Then you’ll have Hottie Kook-Toddie!
thomas
August 25th, 2010
11:19 am
Granny Godzilla
August 25th, 2010
11:09 am
As i claimed that is the cost of the job.
Would you not count the materials that are needed for the job as part of the cost of teh job.
I mean there is no job if tehy don’t buy the products…..
So again show me how my figures are flawed, it cost the United States government $248,181.82 for every job they created.
I know you are unable to say anything contrary or negative about this administration and/or presidency, because you feel you have a point to prove because you ran your mouth so much during the election of ‘08. Most adults learn that we will be wrong from time to time and learn to admit our mistakes….. But this isn’t negative… its simply a statement of fact, the fact that the government spent $248,181.82 for every job they created!
Saul Good
August 25th, 2010
11:19 am
Scout@11:00am
I like it much better compared to the TRILLION $$$ we spent in Iraq. MUCH better.
Jimmy62
August 25th, 2010
11:19 am
Was the CRA responsible for anywhere close to a majority of sub-prime loans? Absolutely not.
Were there sub-prime loans being made in such volumes before the CRA? No.
Were there MBS’s before the CRA was strengthened by Clinton? No.
Was the CRA and the adoption of sub-primes by Fannie and Freddie (who were explicitly NOT supposed to be taking on risky loans, but did so anyway) a leading cause in the creation of the MBS trend that was then continued at even larger volumes by private enterprise? Hell yeah!
Government meddling definitely helped create the trend that destroyed our economy. They don’t have to have been responsible for all the loans to be responsible for making bad decisions that had unintended consequences that started the problem.
Here’s a metaphor. Mr. Politician was standing at the top of a mountain and decided to throw a small rock down the side of the mountain. This started an avalanche. Mr. Politician did not throw down all the rocks, he only threw down one of them, and a small one at that. But he still started the avalanche.
Southern Comfort
August 25th, 2010
11:19 am
Keep up the good fight
I don’t think that’s a good idea. People have the right to watch whatever they wanna watch. Businesses have the right to show whatever they choose. If you don’t like it, don’t frequent the business.
@@
August 25th, 2010
11:19 am
Normal:
It would fit my sorta warped sense of humor to rent a house in a good neighborhood to a passle of Hispanics…maybe down in Clayton County…
You do know the demographics down my way. Have you got something against blacks?
Keep up the good fight!
August 25th, 2010
11:20 am
Oh I can agree with @@ in part…..every day Fox News broadcasts distortions and lies and twists the truth to achieve political propaganda..I feel like we live in 1984 or a socialist/communist regime. Fox News is the fault!
getalife
August 25th, 2010
11:20 am
The gop collapsed the country yet the cons will still vote for them.
Any shrinks in the house?
Obviously, it is some sort of insanity. What should we call it?
I got it.
conservatism.
Jonathan
August 25th, 2010
11:20 am
Jimmy62- I have tried that approach- it falls on deaf ears. The 1099 issue alone will cost the economy more than it is predicted (key term predicted) to bring in. It is more important simply to “believe and hope”.
Sick of Repubs
August 25th, 2010
11:20 am
harvey@11:17 the same way that our Georgia Govenor would take away education funds and then order an investigation into a test cheating scandal.
The CBO
August 25th, 2010
11:20 am
Granny Godzilla
August 25th, 2010
11:02 am
I fell for that one? You’re a Lib, you fall for a lot. LOL
Granny Godzilla
August 25th, 2010
11:21 am
thomas
ok, let’s try it your way.
the school was free so was the bridge.
i bet you think that was a bargain.
Bruno
August 25th, 2010
11:21 am
“2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the Program, Now 7.65% on the first $90,000″
IH–You’re forgetting a substantial segment of the population with your 7.65% figure–the self-employed (Me!) You need to double that figure for us.
Keep up the good fight!
August 25th, 2010
11:21 am
Southern Comfort…absolutely. I am voting with my dollars as are others. If you visit the website, they ask individuals to let those businesses know that they are losing your dollars and offending customers. Nothing wrong with that.