Showing posts with label stock market crash. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stock market crash. Show all posts

Friday, June 10, 2011

Doomsday? China claims U.S. already in default

The faces of stock traders tell the story that big trouble is brewing.The faces of stock traders tell the story that big trouble is brewing.

(Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images

As a means of stirring up political opposition to the intention of Congressional conservatives to refuse to raise the debt ceiling, the Obama Administration, Congressional Democrats, and liberals in general have warned that if we do not raise the debt limit the U.S. will 'default on its obligations to its lenders.' Apparently that warning was highly misplaced. One of America's largest creditor nations, China, is claiming today that the U.S. is already defaulting on its loans. Is this the doomsday many have warned about for at least 3 years?

The Obama Administration has pursued a policy of deliberately devaluing the dollar and spending the nation into oblivion with money that is borrowed. Many astute political observers, including this writer, have warned incessantly that such a policy would ultimately lead to economic collapse. The more the Administration spends borrowed money without restraint, the more likely it is that the nation will default, given that it has no money to pay its creditors and its creditors are becoming more convinced by the day that they cannot lend America any more money.

Without the luxury of continuing to borrow money, the vast majority of America's obligations to senior adults and the disabled poor will go unfunded. This will lead to widespread suffering on a scale never before experienced in the United States of America.

Not surprisingly, the stock market plunged again today in response to such news, dipping below 12,000 for the first time in months. Today's plunge represents the worst sustained decline in stocks since 2002, just after the 9/11 attacks.

What does this mean for the average citizen on the street?

t means inflation will necessarily skyrocket. This has already happened in the food and energy sectors, but the government conveniently does not count these two items in its inflation numbers. Further, look for food shortages, energy shortages, and continued skyrocketing costs. Electricity rates will be raised to historic levels, in keeping with a statement Obama made in 2007, "Under my plan, energy costs will necessarily skyrocket."

The nation can also look for civil unrest as citizens grow increasingly outraged that their government has deliberately pursued policies that have brought the nation to the brink of ruin. Even James Carville, former Bill Clinton advisor, confirmed that such a scenario is not mere speculation or fear-mongering but a distinct possibility.

What can the government do to reverse this march into the abyss? Stop spending money. Cut the budget drastically. Don't borrow any more money. The government must live off of only what it takes in from the citizens in the current tax structure. And taxes must not be raised in any shape, form, or fashion. That would merely throw dirt on the grave.

In addition, the nation must lower the tax rate for business, making this country the most business-friendly nation on earth. Only the private sector can get the economy moving again, and a friendly and non-oppressive tax structure would do the trick in getting businesses to invest and hire workers.

Be sure to catch my blog at The Liberty Sphere. Visit my ministry site at Martin Christian Ministries.

Source: Examiner.com

 

German Rating Agency Feri Downgrades US Government Bonds: AAA to AA!

The first Western downgrade of US government bonds is a fact! The German credit rating agency Feri lowered its rating on US debt by a full notch, from AAA to AA.

Here is the German press release: Feri Downgrades US Gov Debt AAA to AA

The English translation:

Homburg, 8 June 2011 - The Bad Homburg Feri EuroRating & Research AG downgraded the first credit rating agency's credit rating for the United States from AAA to AA. Feri analysts justify the downgrade by the continuing deterioration of the creditworthiness of the country due to high public debt, inadequate fiscal measures, and weaker growth prospects.

"The U.S. government has fought the effects of the financial market crisis primarily by an increase in government debt. We do not see that there is sufficient attention being paid to other measures, "said Dr. Tobias Schmidt, CEO of Feri Rating & Research AG. "Our rating system shows a deterioration in economic health, so the downgrading of the credit ratings of U.S. is warranted."

For the third consecutive year the deficit of the United States is in double digit percentages relative to gross domestic product (GDP). "Deficits of such magnitude are not a sustainable fiscal policy. We would reconsider the rating when the U.S. government creates a long-term sustainable budget," said Schmidt.

Feri Rating is listed on the Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (BaFin) as an EU credit rating agency approved and created with more than 20 years experience in sovereign ratings. Every month, the Feri analysts evaluate sovereign credit ratings from the perspective of a foreign investor based on the ability and willingness of countries to repay their debts. The credit ratings have eleven possible gradations between "AAA" (best credit) and "Default".

Obama's Jobs Plan Takes a Page From Marx

By Investor's Business Daily

Politics: The president has unveiled a plan to cut joblessness with an industrial policy from the 19th century. In this "new" economy, government will pick winners and losers for industry. It didn't work then, it won't work now.

Taking a cue from classical Marxist theory as well as vintage union organizing doctrine, both discounting the value of service work over manufacturing, we now see President Obama touting training for factory jobs over all others, pushing government spending in that area and calling it a jobs recovery plan.

"I see a future where we train workers who make things here in the United States, and continue a important and honorable tradition of folks working with their hands, creating value, not just shuffling paper," he said Wednesday at Northern Virginia Community College, urging students to pack up and go to ... Detroit.

As he announced his public-private "Skills for America" partnership to train and credential 500,000 students for jobs in industries favored by the Obama administration, it bears looking at how at odds this approach is to both history and economic reality.

"We know it means building the infrastructure, the roads and bridges, and manufacturing new products here ... that create good jobs," Obama said. "Above all, it means training and educating our citizens to out-compete workers from other countries."

The Bill Moyers crowd has been touting manufacturing-era nostalgia for years, claiming the world would go back on its axis if America could just shut its market and put everyone back into blue collars, turning gears and listening for the lunch whistle.

Fact is, the more advanced the economy, the greater percentage of the work force that moves out of manufacturing and into services.

Economists call this the "tertiary progression" of development - from farming and fishing, to the Industrial Revolution, to an advanced service economy. Every rich nation has followed this path - every one.

In the U.S., that move started not last decade but more than 70 years ago. In the U.S. there are six times more service workers than factory workers, boasting higher skills and per capita income. U.S. trade data consistently show U.S. surpluses in service exports across the board because that's America's competitive advantage.

Now the president wants us to "give back" all that white collar development and return to a simpler sort of economy premised on manufacturing - one that's more characteristic of today's China or Peru than a developed economy such as America.

Amazingly, he wants this even though he admits state-directed industrial policy has failed. "We've got a lot of programs out there," he said. "If a program does not work in training people for the jobs of the future and getting them a job, we should eliminate that program."

Which defies belief when one recalls he's holding up job-creating free-trade treaties with Colombia, Panama and South Korea for just such a useless training program called "Trade Adjustment Assistance," or TAA.

That program is so bad a 2008 American University study by Kara Reynolds and John Palatucci declared it "of dubious value in terms of helping displaced workers find new, well-paying employment opportunities." Obama is holding up a proven way to create jobs - trade deals - to expand TAA from $2 billion to $7 billion.

It's as if all the economic knowledge acquired in the course of the 20th century never made it to the Obama White House. Obama wants to pick industrial winners while the economy languishes from high taxes, massive new regulatory burdens and his failure on free trade.

The only logic that can explain this is that Obama means to spend more money on vocational education to prepare kids for work in industries dominated by unions - Obama's main base of political support.

Presumably, if enough community college students can be trained for traditionally unionized manufacturers, employers will have no choice but to hire them. That's a win-win-win-win for educational bureaucrats, unions, jobs and Obama's political prospects.

Too bad the rest of the economy - which accounts for three-quarters of all U.S. output - didn't make Obama's list of industrial winners.

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

A Rising Tide of 'UnderWater' Homeowners & John McCain's Plan

Image: Foreclosed homes

"It is very possible that there will ultimately be more homeowners underwater in this period than any time in our history," says Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Economy.com.   

Justin Sullivan / Getty Images file

 Do Facts Matter?

ACORN, Obama and the Present Mortgage Mess

Pollsters facing election's perfect storm

A rising tide of ‘underwater’ homeowners

No bottom to stock market clearly in sight

Palin's family ties include FDR, Princess Diana

Bailout Politics

New bailout czar doesn’t want prodigy label

No bottom to stock market clearly in sight

Fed rate cuts 101:  What they can, and can’t do

Nearly 1 in 6 homeowners is ‘underwater’

Global rate cut does little to calm markets

U.S. Fed leads round of global rate cuts

Forecasters see U.S. leading global downturn

updated 2:58 p.m. PT, Wed., Oct. 8, 2008

The relentless slide in home prices has left nearly one in six U.S. homeowners owing more on a mortgage than the home is worth, raising the possibility of a rise in defaults — the very misfortune that touched off the credit crisis last year.

The result of homeowners being "underwater" is more pressure on an economy that is already in a downturn. No longer having equity in their homes makes people feel less rich and thus less inclined to shop at the mall.

And having more homeowners underwater is likely to mean more eventual foreclosures, because it is hard for borrowers in financial trouble to refinance or sell their homes and pay off their mortgage if their debt exceeds the home's value. A foreclosed home, in turn, tends to lower the value of other homes in its neighborhood.

About 75.5 million U.S. households own the homes they live in. After a housing slump that has pushed values down 30 percent in some areas, roughly 12 million households, or 16 percent, owe more than their homes are worth, according to Moody's Economy.com.

The comparable figures were roughly 4 percent underwater in 2006 and 6 percent last year, says the firm's chief economist, Mark Zandi, who adds that "it is very possible that there will ultimately be more homeowners underwater in this period than any time in our history."

Among people who bought within the past five years, it's worse: 29 percent are underwater on their mortgages, according to an estimate by real-estate Web site Zillow.com.

Bailout may help homeowners a little
The majority of homeowners still have equity, and even among those who don't, many continue to make their mortgage payments on time. The financial-bailout legislation could at least "keep things from getting much worse" by helping banks avoid the need to tighten credit further, says Celia Chen, director of housing economics at Economy.com. Still, she expects housing credit to remain tight and home prices to decline in much of the country for another year or so.

Prices are back to 2003 levels in the San Diego and Boston metropolitan areas, and back to 2004 levels in Las Vegas, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Fort Lauderdale, Fla., and Minneapolis, according to First American CoreLogic, a data firm in Santa Ana, Calif.

A sign is posted in front of a bank owned home that is for sale in Richmond, California.

Stephanie and Jason Kirschenman thought they were being prudent when they agreed in late 2004 to buy a new four-bedroom home in Lodi, Calif., for $458,000. They put a substantial 20 percent down and chose a loan with a fixed interest rate for the first 10 years. Two years later, they took out a second mortgage to pay off some bills.

At the time, the home was appraised for about $550,000. But a mortgage broker recently estimated its value at well below the $380,000 the family owes on it, says Ms. Kirschenman. "We were quite shocked," she says.

Cracked foundation graphic
History isn't about to repeat itself
Words to calm the woozy investor
Bailout includes key tax breaks

The Kirschenmans, who both work for a company that makes trailer hitches, thought about sending the keys to the lender. But their financial planner, Christopher Olsen, helped persuade them to stick with the house, noting that they could still afford the payments.

Others aren't so lucky. Among mortgages on one- to four-family homes, 9.16 percent were a month or more overdue or were in foreclosure in the second quarter, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association. That compared with 6.52 percent a year before and was the highest level since the association began such surveys 39 years ago.

Falling values have contributed to a sharp pullback in mortgage lending. In the third quarter, mortgage lending fell to the lowest level in eight years — down 44 percent in a year — says the publication Inside Mortgage Finance.

One reason is that as home values slip, growing numbers of would-be borrowers lack sufficient equity to refinance. The falling values also make mortgage lending look riskier to banks, spurring them to tighten credit standards.

Most mortgages in default were issued in 2006 and 2007, when lending standards were loosest and the housing market was peaking. Many who bought then made small down payments or none, so they had little equity in their homes from the start.

The performance of loans made earlier is getting worse, too, as price declines deplete the equity people built up. In Las Vegas, 6 percent of home loans made in 2004 are now 30 days or more overdue, up from 3.7 percent a year earlier, according to research firm LPS Applied Analytics.

In July, Congress enacted legislation designed to help borrowers who owe more than their homes are worth by allowing them to refinance into a government-backed loan, provided their mortgage company forgives part of their principal. It's not clear how many borrowers the program will help, because before reducing the principal, lenders would almost always try first to freeze or reduce borrowers' interest rate to make payments more affordable, says Tom Deutsch, deputy executive director of the American Securitization Forum, an industry group.

In contrast with the 12 million home borrowers estimated to be underwater, 64 million have equity in their homes. These include 24 million households who own their homes free and clear, and 40 million whose homes remain worth more than is owed on them.

Even so, some borrowers fret that declining prices and tighter lending standards could make it hard for them to tap their equity.

Steven Schneider, a mortgage broker in Miami, bought his home at the end of 1992. When he refinanced about four years ago, he pulled out $150,000 in cash that he intended to use to build an addition. The transaction raised his total debt to about $350,000, at a time when his home had a value of about $650,000.

Recently, Mr. Schneider pulled out roughly $90,000 by tapping a home-equity line of credit. He says he put the funds in a money-market account that yields less than the 5 percent interest rate on the loan. "I was afraid they were going to shut down" access to the credit line, says Mr. Schneider. He figures his home, once valued at $750,000, now is worth about $600,000.

Pain varies from place to place
How much pain homeowners feel varies greatly from place to place. The most severe drops in home values are in parts of California, Florida, Nevada, Arizona and other areas where speculation pushed prices up and builders far overestimated demand.

Within metro areas, neighborhoods with short commutes are holding up better than others. And in many parts of Texas and North Carolina, home prices have continued to rise slowly, have leveled off or have declined only modestly.

On a national basis, home prices peaked in mid-2006 after rising 86 percent since January 2000, according to the First American index. Since peaking, that index has fallen 13 percent.

The declines have made homes more affordable, bringing prices in many areas closer to their long-term relationship to incomes. In the second quarter, the median home price of about $203,000 was 1.9 times average pretax household income, according to Economy.com. That was close to 1.87 times income for 1985 through 2000, prior to the housing boom.

Housing markets don't tend to turn around quickly. The price slump in California in the early 1990s, for instance, was a long grind. According to the S&P/Case-Shiller home-price indexes, Los Angeles prices peaked in June 1990 and didn't bottom until March 1996. They didn't get back to their 1990 peak until 2000.

By James R. Hagerty and Ruth Simon

Letter From John McCain

My Friends,


Millions of Americans on Main Street are feeling the effects of our current economic crisis largely brought on by corruption and greed at Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Wall Street. Our next president must come into office with a plan to address the very root the failing housing market.


Last night, during my debate with Senator Obama, I announced my plan to fix the root of our problem and I'd like to share a little more with you today.


If elected president, I will direct my Treasury Secretary to implement an American Homeownership Resurgence Plan to keep families in their homes, avoid foreclosures, save failing neighborhoods, stabilize the housing market and attack the roots of our financial crisis.


America's families are bearing a heavy burden from falling housing prices, mortgage delinquencies, foreclosures, and a weak economy. It is important that those families who have worked hard enough to finance homeownership not have that dream crushed under the weight of the wrong mortgage.


For those that cannot make inflated payments or their mortgage exceeds the value of their home, mortgages must be re-structured to put losses on the books and put homeowners in manageable mortgages.


This Resurgence Plan would purchase mortgages directly from homeowners and mortgage servicers, and replace them with manageable, fixed-rate mortgages that will keep families in their homes.


By purchasing the existing, failing mortgages the resurgence plan will eliminate uncertainty over defaults, support the value of mortgage-backed derivatives and alleviate risks that are freezing financial markets.


I am ready to lead our country out of this financial crisis and I am ready to work with anyone and everyone who will help. Together, I know we can work together to find solutions for these challenging times. Please do your part today and spread the word about my new plan by forwarding my letter on on to your neighbors, friends, family and coworkers. Thank you for your time and support.
Sincerely,

John McCain

P.S. Homeownership represents the very core of our American economic system. This is not the time for politics. We must move aggressively to provide relief and stability for all Americans.

Saturday, October 4, 2008

Thought For The Day - 10.04.08

“The Greatest Fear Is Fear Itself!” …President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the man that Joe Biden and Katie Couric thought was president when the American Stock Market crashed in 1929.

(Nothing Gets Our Attention Like Fear says Gavin de Becker, Security Expert & Author of ‘The Gift of Fear’  & ‘Fear Less’.  He also says that what Americans should fear the most is the ‘cure’, the rights we have given up so freely since 9/11, the invasive precautions we now accept in the name of security and the daily local news broadcast that keeps us in a state of fear!!)

Biden Secret Service Codename: 'Assassination Insurance'

While Gov. Sarah Palin is being grilled on her position on mark-to-market accounting rules, the press can't bother to ask Joe Biden if he could give us a ballpark estimate on when Franklin D. Roosevelt was president -- or maybe take a stab at guessing the decade when televisions were first available to the public. 

Being interviewed by Katie Couric on the "CBS Evening News," Biden said: "When the stock market crashed, Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television and didn't just talk about the, you know, the princes of greed. He said, 'Look, here's what happened."

For those of you who aren't hard-core history buffs, Biden not only named the wrong president during the 1929 stock market crash, he also claimed a president who wasn't president during the stock market crash went on TV before Americans had TVs.

Other than that, the statement holds up pretty well. At least Biden managed to avoid mentioning any "clean" Negroes he had met.

Couric was nearly moved to tears by the brilliance of Biden's brain-damaged remark. She was especially intrigued by Biden's claim that FDR had said the new iPhone was the bomb!

Here is Couric's full response to Biden's bizarre outburst about FDR (a) being president and (b) going on TV in 1929: "Relating to the fears of the average American is one of Biden's strong suits."  ...Yet she is the one looking down on Sarah Palin; scrunching up her face in looks of bewilderment.

But when our beauteous Sarah said that John McCain was a better leader on the economy than Barack Obama, Couric relentlessly badgered her for evidence. "Why do you say that?" Couric demanded. "Why are they waiting for John McCain and not Barack Obama? ... Can you give us any more examples of his leading the charge for more oversight?"

The beauteous Sarah had cited McCain's prescient warnings about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. But Couric, the crackerjack journalist who didn't know FDR wasn't president in 1929, demanded more examples from Palin.

We are currently in the middle of a massive financial crisis brought on by Fannie Mae. McCain was right on Fannie Mae; Obama was wrong. That's not enough?

Not for the affable Eva Braun of evening TV! "I'm just going to ask you one more time," Couric snipped, "not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation?" 

This would be like responding to someone who predicted the 9/11 attacks by saying: OK, you got one thing right. Not to belabor the point, but what else?

Obama was not merely wrong on Fannie Mae: He is owned by Fannie Mae. 

Somehow Obama managed to become the second biggest all-time recipient of Fannie Mae political money after only three years in the Senate. The biggest beneficiary, Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd, had a 30-year head start on receiving loot from Fannie Mae -- the government-backed institution behind our current crisis.

How does the Democratic ticket stack up on other major issues facing the nation, say, gas prices?

Shockingly, Sen. Joe Biden was one of only five senators to vote against the first Alaskan pipeline bill in 1973. This is like having been a Nazi sympathizer during World War II. If Sarah Palin does nothing else, she has got to tie that idiotic pipeline vote around Biden's neck.

The Senate passed the 1973 Alaskan pipeline bill by an overwhelming 80-5 vote. Only five senators voted against the pipeline on final passage. Sen. Biden is the only one who is still in the Senate -- the other four having been confined to mental institutions long ago.

The stakes were clear: This was in the midst of the first Arab oil embargo. Liberal Democrats, such as senators Robert Byrd, Mike Mansfield, Frank Church and Hubert Humphrey, all voted for the pipeline.

But Biden cast one of only five votes against the pipeline that has produced more than 15 billion barrels of oil, supplied nearly 20 percent of this nation's oil, created tens of thousands of jobs, added hundreds of billions of dollars to the U.S. economy and reduced money transfers to the nation's enemies by about the same amount.

The only argument against the pipeline was that it would harm the caribou, an argument that was both trivial and wrong. The caribou population near the pipeline increased from 5,000 in the 1970s to 32,000 by 2002.

It would have been bad enough to vote against the pipeline bill even if it had hurt the caribou. A sane person would still say: Our enemies have us in a vice grip. Sorry, caribou, you've got to take one for the team. But when the pipeline goes through and the caribou population sextuples in the next 20 years, you really look like a moron.

We couldn't possibly expect Couric to ask Biden about a vote that is the equivalent of voting against the invention of the wheel. But couldn't she have come up with just one follow-up question for Biden on FDR's magnificent handling of the 1929 stock market crash?

Or here's a question the public is dying to know: "If Obama wanted a historically delusional vice president, why not Lyndon LaRouche?" At least LaRouche didn't vote against the Alaskan pipeline.

The media also keeps telling us that Obama is ahead in the polls by as much as 9 percentage points, because of his ‘handling’ of the present economic crisis… Handling???  He is nowhere around!!  And as we all know, statistics and polls can be interpreted and spun by anyone who wants to and needs to… The fact is that only one poll, that interviewed Democrats to Republicans 2 to 1, shows Obama ahead of McCain by more than 3 percentage points… while others show them from 3 percentage points apart to being in a dead heat, even with all the media spin for Obama and with McCain being off the campaign trail and doing his job in Washington.

By Ann Coulter for NewsMax

“McCain wants to ‘put his country first’. The best way is simple: Get aggressive and win the election!” …Larry Elder, who says McCain needs to take off the gloves!