Banks are NOT looking to hang onto REO property. Read Basel III. 150% risk weight for distressed...
How Much Are Intelligence Analysts Front Running Markets?
The whispers about private equity exiting the rental market are now out in the open. A few reports are highlighting that some private equity investors are testing the waters for an exit via IPOs. Some have asked why it is necessary for these investors to hold onto properties for a few years before exiting. One of the main reasons is for valuation purposes given that it takes a few years to gather enough workable data on say a block of 1,000 homes and their overall vacancy rates, rental rates, and expense ratios. This would be important if this pool of homes were to be converted into an income stream for investors. Yet many are now looking to exit given how hot the stock market is. You want to sell into momentum. A few other key points include rents falling in places like Las Vegas where investor demand has been incredibly high. Is the hot money planning an exit?
A trade is officially deemed "crowded" when everyone is rushing into the market with eyes only on the upside and little concern for the downside--for example, buying homes as rentals. Why could the buy-to-rent housing party be running out of air? The basic reason is the difference between buying real estate as rental housing, which is a speculative market, and the rental property market itself, which is grounded in real-world supply and demand. Simply put, if the supply of rental housing exceeds demand, rents (the cost of renting shelter) decline. That jeopardizes the fat returns the speculative buyer was counting on. Crowded trades are often described as boats with everyone on one side. Boats loaded in this fashion tend to capsize once exposed to the slightest volatility (wave action). The buy-to-rent boat is looking rather overloaded, and the bullish side's gunwales are only a few inches above the water for these six reasons.
Who knows? I might even become an EE'er. This joke is on me.
It must be pointed out that gold is certainly no longer the bargain it was at the lows over a decade ago (at which time Warren Buffett undoubtedly hated it just as much as today). This is by no means akin to saying that there is no longer a bull market in force though. What seems however extremely unlikely to us is that the long term bull market is anywhere near to being over. After all, the people in charge of fiscal and monetary policy all over the globe are applying their 'tried and true' recipe to the perceived economic ills of the world in ever bigger gobs of 'more of the same'. Until that changes – and we feel pretty sure that the only thing that can usher in profound change on that score is a crisis of such proportions that the ability of said authorities to keep things under control by employing this recipe is simply overwhelmed – there is no reason not to hold gold in order to insure oneself against their depredations.
While Krugman does not by any means endorse the level of centralism that Diocletian introduced, his defence of bailouts, his insistence on the planning of interest rates and inflation, and (most frighteningly) his insistence that war can be an economic stimulus (in reality, war is a capital destroyer) all put him firmly in Diocletian’s economic planning camp. So how did Diocletian’s economic program work out? Well, I think it is fair to say even without modern data that — just as Krugman desires — Diocletian’s measures boosted aggregate demand through public works and — just as Krugman desires — it introduced inflation. And certainly Rome lived for almost 150 years after Diocletian. However the long term effects of Diocletian’s economic program were dire. Have the 2008 bailouts done the same thing, cementing a new feudal aristocracy of bankers, financiers and too-big-to-fail zombies, alongside a serf class that exists to fund the excesses of the financial and corporate elite? Only time will tell.
As I observe the zombie like reactions of Americans to our catastrophic economic highway to collapse, the continued plundering and pillaging of the national treasury by criminal Wall Street bankers, non-enforcement of existing laws against those who committed the largest crime in history, and reaction to young people across the country getting beaten, bludgeoned, shot with tear gas and pepper sprayed by police, I can’t help but wonder whether there is anyone home. Why are most Americans so passively accepting of these calamitous conditions? How did we become so comfortably numb? I’ve concluded Americans have chosen willful ignorance over thoughtful critical thinking due to their own intellectual laziness and overpowering mind manipulation by the elite through their propaganda emitting media machines. Some people are awaking from their trance, but the vast majority is still slumbering or fuming at erroneous perpetrators... The American people are paying the price for allowing a few evil men to gain control of our government... We now unquestioningly accept being molested in airports. We shrug as our intelligence agencies eavesdrop on our telephone conversations and emails without the need for a court order. It is now taken for granted that we imprison people without charging them with a crime and assassinate suspected terrorists in foreign countries with predator drones. Invading countries and going to war no longer requires a declaration of war by Congress as required by the Constitution. The State grows ever more powerful.
President Obama is taking credit for a new government plan to "save homeowners." That is of course pure propaganda to mask the plan's true goal: the perfection of debt-serfdom. The basic thrust of the plan is straightforward: encourage "underwater" homeowners whose mortgages exceed the value of their homes to re-finance at lower rates. The stated incentive (i.e. the PR pitch) is to lower homeowners' monthly payments via lower interest rates. This is the Federal Reserve's entire game plan in a nutshell: don't write off any debt, as that would reveal the banking sector's insolvency, but play extend-and-pretend with crushing debtloads by lowering the cost of servicing the debt. The key purpose of this "plan" is to leave the principle owed to banks on their books at full value while ensnaring the hapless debt-serf (the "homeowner") into permanent servitude to the banks. If the net worth of your home is a negative number, then what exactly do you own? You have the right to occupy the shelter, and you own the debt. So how is this any different from a lease? There is no equity, and no equity being built: there is a monthly payment in return for the right to occupy the dwelling.
Bank of America Lynch[ing this] CountryWide's Equity Is Likely Worthess and It Will Rape FDIC Insured Accounts Going BustSubmitted by Reggie Middleton on 10/22/2011 06:50 -0500
Warning! Highly controversial post. Long. Thick (with information) & HARD [hitting]! Thus if you are easily offended by pretty women, intellectually aggressive brothers in cognitive war garb, government regulators selling you out to the highest European bidder, or cold hard facts borne from world class research not seen in the sell side or the mainstream media, I strongly suggest you stop reading here and move on. There is nothing further for you to see.
The result, for now, is that Greece’s dreaded appointment with the Ghost of Default Future has been postponed. The cycle of austerity, protests, bondholder angst, and threats of default, followed by another round of bailouts, continues.
Hi GW, It’s been so long! I’ve been skiing like a madman down here in Chile—but I did catch something you wrote, which I’d like to comment on, now that a blizzard has hit the slopes and I’m stuck inside with not much to do. You wrote a post yesterday, picked up by Zero Hedge and others, pointing out that Paul Krugman is advocating war as a fiscal stimulus solution. You pointed out that this position he holds is not only blatantly immoral, it is a position Krugman seems to have no problem openly pushing—your unspoken implication being that this is disastrous, considering how influential Krugman is in major policy circles. With regards to K. pushing for war as the ultimate Keynesian economic solution: I hate to say “I told you so”—but in this case—I told you so! (Cheers, mate.)
So the way my world works is I wake up and I check my BlackBerry, which is a uranium mine of information. The reason it's so rich with information is I have the benefit of all my legacy brokerage and financial research coming into it, I have all the current NBC clippings and headlines (from tsunami coverage to Casey Anthony to the White House) and I have my Twitter feed, which is probably the best monitor of what's breaking. For my first pass, I look at The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Financial Times and all the major news organizations' Twitter feeds. On the second pass, I'm looking at the financial universe: the price of oil, currency pricings, etc. Then I'll log onto my computer and check the homepages of The Huffington Post, Politico, Zero Hedge, The New York Times and Financial Times and I'll read Naked Capitalism just to see what Yves Smith is saying about the banking system. I don't subscribe to any print media. I wouldn't read a newspaper now unless you put a gun to my head and even then I would really try to negotiate with you. It's not that I reject the content, it's that I reject the format.
In this respect, the war being waged against Greece by the European Central Bank (ECB) may best be seen as a dress rehearsal not only for the rest of Europe, but for what financial lobbyists would like to bring about globally.
Greece is not in court. But there is talk of a “higher law,” much as was discussed in the United States before the Civil War regarding slavery. At issue today is the financial analogue, debt peonage.