Millennials Seek “Generic Father Figure” For Backyard BBQ On Craigslist

A group of millennials in Spokane, Washington are seeking a “generic father figure” to help them host a barbecue on Father's Day weekend.  In the Craigslist post which has explicably since gone viral, college student Dane Anderson and his “boys” are offering free food and booze to any enterprising area dad who’s willing to come to their party next Saturday and man the grill for a few hours.

Anderson, who was interviewed by local NBC affiliate KHQ, says he created the post because he and his roommates, who range in age from 21 to 26, live too far away from their own dads.

For any interested dads, duties include:

  • Grilling hamburgers and hotdogs (whilst drinking beer)
  • Bringing your own grill (though this is subject to change. We will provide all of the meat)
  • Refer to all attendees as "Big Guy', "Chief", "Sport", "Champ" etc. (whilst drinking beer)
  • Talk about dad things, like lawnmowers, building your own deck, Jimmy Buffet, etc. Funny anecdotes are highly encouraged. All whilst drinking beer.

The "boys" are looking for dads with a minimum of 18 years' experience as a father, a minimum of 10 years' grilling experience and "an appreciation of a nice, cold beer on a hot summer day." For what it's worth, Anderson & Co. say they know how to grill, but that “none of us are prepared to fill the role of BBQ dad.”

Oh, and since we are talking about millennials broke college students, Anderson says he and his roommates can’t afford to pay their stand-in “dad", though they’re offering compensation in the form of "all the food and cold beer your heart desires.”

Anderson told KHQ that the ad has yielded a handful of responses. But at least one interested dad didn’t pan out.

"There was one guy stan who sent us a message but then he stopped replying,” Anderson told KHQ. Now that the media has helped transform Anderson's post into a viral sensation, he and his roommates might try and recruit as many as three dads to help with the festivities.

“We’re just looking for a dad to come and crack a cold one with the boys,” Dane said. The nature of Anderson's relationship with his own father – and whether or not he plans to call and wish him a happy father’s day – remains unclear.

via http://ift.tt/2qO2RlQ Tyler Durden

Van Rams Into Pedestrians On London Bridge Followed By Knife Attack: Live Feed

* * *

In what may be a repeat of the deadly March 22 terrorist attack on Westminster Bridge in London which killed 5 people, moments ago BBC and Sky news both reported that a van has hit pedestrians on London Bridge in central London, with armed police understood to be at scene.

According to Will Heaven, managing editor of the Spectator, a man crashed into people on the bridgge, “then there was stabbing attack.”

According to Sky News, “all the information points in the direction of another terrorist attack.”

Developing

via http://ift.tt/2rwF7Qt Tyler Durden

NSA Whistleblower Accuses Agency Of “Mass Electronic Surveillance”

While former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney was burnishing his credentials as a master of the corporate turnaround during the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, US intelligence agencies were testing out their capabilities for mass electronic surveillance according to a recent Associated Press report. Ex-NSA spy Thomas Drake has alleged as much in a statement filed in support of a lawsuit brought by former Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson. Anderson has said that the lawsuit is designed to get more information about what he calls covert, illegal operations.

Drake wrote in the declaration, released Friday, that the NSA collected and stored virtually all electronic communications going into or out of Salt Lake, including contents of texts and emails, something which another famous NSA whistleblower and former senior NSA crypto-mathematician, William Binney, alleged back in 201, long before Edward Snowden emerged on the scene, when he explained how the NSA’s Utah Data Center soaks up and retains every form of electronic communication, also known as the NSa’s Project Stellar Wind.

Here’s Drake, as quoted by the AP:

“Officials in the NSA and FBI viewed the Salt Lake Olympics Field Op as a golden opportunity to bring together resources from both agencies to experiment with and fine tune a new scale of mass surveillance,” Drake wrote.

If Drake’s account is accurate, this would directly contradict statements about the intelligence agencies’ conduct during the 2002 Winter Games which took place shortly after the September 11th terror attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, including testimony from one of most infamous prevaricators, former NSA and CIA chief Michael Hayden, who denied in court documents that the program existed.

Current NSA operations director Wayne Murphy said in court documents that NSA surveillance in Salt Lake City was limited to international communications in which at least one participant was reasonably believed to be associated with foreign terrorist groups.

Drake however disputed these statements, writing that he spoke with colleagues who worked on the operation and were concerned about its legality. He said he also saw documents showing surveillance equipment being directed to the Utah program.The NSA has argued the lawsuit’s claims are far-fetched speculation about a program that may never have existed. Still, a judge refused a DOJ request to dismiss the lawsuit in January, suggesting some exciting discovery material may be revealed in the future.

The suit is yet another campaign to unveil the means by which the Deep State conducts mass surveillance both at home and abroad, that’s gathered renewed interest since President Trump took office – stoked by a flurry of anonymously sourced stories out of the WaPo-NYT-CNN media axis.

In March, Wikileaks released “Vault 7,” a collection of thousands of documents demonstrating the extent to which the CIA uses backdoors to hack smartphones, computer operating systems, messenger applications and internet-connected televisions.

An intelligence source quoted by WSJ said that Wikileaks revelations “were far more significant than the leaks of Edward Snowden.” WSJ adds:

“Mr. Snowden’s leaks revealed names of programs, companies that assist the NSA in surveillance and in some cases the targets of American spying. But the recent leak purports to contain highly technical details about how surveillance is carried out. That would make them far more revealing and useful to an adversary, this person said. In one sense, Mr. Snowden provided a briefing book on U.S. surveillance, but the CIA leaks could provide the blueprints.”

Drake started working for the NSA in 2001 and blew the whistle on what he saw as a wasteful and invasive program. He was later prosecuted for keeping classified information. Most of the charges were dropped before trial in 2011, and he was sentenced to one year of probation.

via http://ift.tt/2qNKBsI Tyler Durden

Liberty Links 06/03/17

If you appreciate my work, and want to contribute to genuine, independent media, consider visiting our Support Page.

Must Reads

Hell Is Empty And All the Hedge Fund Managers Are At The Bellagio (I hope one day I can write half as good as this person, The Concourse)

When the Left Turns on Its Own (Total insanity, The New York Times)

The Campus Mob Came for Me—and You, Professor, Could Be Next (More on the insanity above, The Wall Street Journal)

Chinese Workers “Disappeared” While Investigating Ivanka Trump Brands (Lovely, Zerohedge)

How to Lose $8k Worth of Bitcoin in 15 Minutes with Verizon and Coinbase.com (Very disturbing, a similar thing happened to me, Medium)

Ross Ulbricht Loses His Appeal Over Conviction and Sentencing in Silk Road Case (This is so messed up, Reason)

U.S. Politics

See More Links »

from Liberty Blitzkrieg http://ift.tt/2rDZBbY
via IFTTT

The Biggest Real Estate Bubble Of All Time Just Did The Impossible

One month ago, we said that “the Vancouver housing bubble Is back, and it’s (almost) bigger than ever.”

Fast forward to today, when we can scrap the almost part: according to the latest data from the Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver, nearly a year after British Columbia implemented a 15% property tax targeting foreign buyers, in May the biggest real estate bubble of all time did the impossible and in a testament to the persistence of Chinese oligarchs, criminals, money launderers and pretty much anyone who is desperate to park their cash as far away as possible, after a modest drop following last summer’s tax the Vancouver housing bubble has bounced right back to new all time highs, as prices of detached, attached houses and apartment all surged to new record highs.

According to the Real Estate Board, rhe breakdown in prices by category was as follows:

  • For condominiums, the benchmark price was C$571,300 last month, a 17.8% jump over the past 12 months and 3.1% more than April 2017.
  • The benchmark price of an attached unit was C$715,400, 13.1% more than a year ago, and a 1.9% increase compared to April 2017.
  • The benchmark price for detached properties was $1,561,000, an 3.1% increase over the last 12 months and a 2.9% increase compared to April 2017.

The only thing that did fall in May was the number of actual transactions, as residential property sales in the region totaled 4,364 in May 2017, a decrease of 8.5% from the 4,769 sales in May 2016, an all-time record.

In other words, all that the 15% surtax achieved was to drastically slowdown the rate of transactions (or perhaps home flipping). Meanwhile, as sellers held out to find more aggressive buyers, they were in luck as the new wave of buyers has emerged, and undeterred by the 15% premium, they have been slowly but surely lifting all available offers.

While there is little we can add to this month’s update that we didn’t already say a month ago, below we again put Canada’s housing market, and bubble, in perspective with some of our favorite charts, first showing total Canadian household debt compared to the US. Most of this is in the form of mortgages.

Next, despite Canada’s low rates, the debt service ratio of an average Canadian household is nearly 40% higher than when compared to the US.

And finally, the punchline: indexed home prices in Canada compared to the US. This needs to commentary.

In retrospect, perhaps Canada was lucky that the attempt to deflate the Vancouver housing bubble failed, had it succeeded and spread across the nation leading to a historic crash and collapse in collateral values and widespread defaults, the “mean-reversion” outcome would have been devastating for the Canadian banking sector. Which of course, is not to say that Canada’s problem has been fixed, but at least for the time being, the can has been kicked once again, courtesy of Chinese buyers who would rather park their cash in Canada than at home.

via http://ift.tt/2rnWB2R Tyler Durden

Trump Didn’t Kill The Paris Agreement – It Was Already Dead

Authored by Arthur Wardle via InsideSources.com,

President Trump recently removed the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement, heralded by many as a major win for global climate action. The Paris Climate Agreement, signed during the Obama administration, attempted to include the entire world and managed to amass 195 signatories.

Given that international climate negotiations are notoriously difficult, that can only be evidence of two things: either the Paris agreement was a truly monumental agreement in which the entire world came together to respond effectively to a global problem or it was so toothless that nobody bothered to object. All things considered, it was probably the latter.

The agreement itself contains very few direct requirements, instead relying on nations to interpret independently and work toward various ill-defined goals. This problem led James Henson, the “father of global awareness of climate change” and an ex-NASA scientist, to condemn the agreement as a fraud. It lacks any enforcement mechanism, instead relying on nations voluntarily to reduce emissions.

Assuming that countries will voluntarily subject themselves to emissions reductions brings into question the need for an international agreement in the first place. Why else would Exxon, Shell, Peabody and other fossil fuel companies traditionally hated by the environmental movement defend the accord? The excitement of many Paris agreement supporters following these statements exposes their naivete.

People worldwide lauded the accord for including 195 countries, but the inclusion of so much of the developing and undeveloped world may have neutered the agreement. Including undeveloped nations in a global climate agreement presents a double bind. Either the outcome will stymie much-needed and fossil fuel-dependent development, or the agreement will not do much at all.

The Paris Agreement, again, took the latter approach by failing to make meaningful change. The agreement’s already vague and unenforceable requirements for developed countries are even more diluted for lower income countries. Interest in the agreement among many low-income countries likely stems from the $100 billion earmarked for payouts to assist in adaptation and mitigation.

Yet even the source of these funds are up in the air, with international public pledges still well beneath the agreed-upon amount. If the money does materialize, the agreement fails to outline any monitoring to make sure funds are used appropriately or a mechanism for their transmission. If mitigating emissions is really the only goal, that money would probably be more effectually spent where sizeable emissions are actually occurring — the developed world.

Including the entire world in climate agreements is unnecessary and, as illustrated above, is likely to reduce their effectiveness. If an international agreement does prove useful for addressing climate change, a better agreement would place responsibility for carbon emissions squarely in the lap of those who emitted them: large, developed countries.

The United States and European Union alone are responsible for more than 50 percent of emissions since 1850. Thus, there’s no reason to complicate negotiations with a worldwide agreement, nor to add to the developing world’s biggest challenge of tackling poverty. If less developed nations are considered at all, it should be to carve out room for their emissions to grow as they develop.

The Trump administration’s decision to leave the Paris agreement may have ramifications such as straining diplomatic relationships, but the claim that Trump is undoing the ultimate solution to global climate change cannot be justified by a plain reading of the agreement’s text. Hand-wringing over the United States’ exit fails to recognize that the Paris agreement is more of a symbolic vanity project for world diplomats than an actionable plan for addressing climate issues.

 

via http://ift.tt/2rRdHYs Tyler Durden

Which States Have Suffered The Biggest Retail Losses

With the great retail bankruptcy tsunami claiming its latest victim on Thursday, when Gymboree announced it wouldn’t make its June 1 interest payment guaranteeing a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing in the next month, the signs continue to mount that the next “big short– either in the form of REITs, CMBS, CMBX, or single name stocks as discussed here – is shorting America’s bloated retail sector in general, and that staple of US “bricks and mortar” retailers in particular, the mall.

As a reminder, last week Credit Suisse made the remarkable prediction that over the next five years, no less than 25% of US mall will close, which in light of the record store closures in just the first five months of the year…

… does not sound too farfetched. After all, the US has an unprecedented glut of retail space which will have to be rationalized either in bankruptcy court or otherwise, before the retail sector can resume growing again. Recall that at the current pace of retail store closures, by the end of 2017, total square footage reductions could reach an all time high of 147M square feet, surpassing the historical peak of 115M in 2001.

Yet like with everything else in the United States, the problem is not uniform, with great result variance on a state by state basis. So, in order to identify potential patterns that could help focus the search for where the “next big CMBS short” should be located geographically, and where loans are most at risk of default, Goldman looked at the experience of retail loans in CMBS 1.0 deals from the 2006-2007 vintages, cohorts which had high loss rates.

One pattern that emerges from the CMBS 1.0 experience is that retail losses were particularly high in the states which faced economic stress in the last recession, such as AZ, NV and MI (Exhibit 3). This pattern suggests extra care should be applied to monitoring CMBS 3.0 loans in states at particular risk of experiencing economic distress in a potential future recession. Candidates here that we would list would include the oil states (TX, LA, OK) and also CT, a state that has experienced job and population loss in recent years, and where no less than three cities, including state capital Hartford, are now on the verge of bankruptcy.

via http://ift.tt/2qNooLn Tyler Durden

The US Unemployment Rate Is Now Below The Average Recession “Entry Point”

Submitted by Eric Hickman of Kessler Companies

We have begun to see the ‘event-horizon’ (Lance Roberts) of an economic slowdown in several indicators. Adding to that, and counter-intuitively perhaps, an unemployment rate this low (4.29%) is a signal to run-away from Stocks and run-to Treasuries.

Historically, unemployment rate lows have occurred at, or very near-to, market inflection points preceding recessions (see green and red hash marks in chart below). The unemployment rate just released on 6/2/2017 at 4.29% is now just below the average unemployment “entry prior” to recessions over the last 67 years, at 4.4%.

Also, it is now below the low before the “Great Recession” 10 years ago, at 4.4% in March of 2007. While further improvement in employment is certainly possible, it has become senseless to bet on that it does.

As we have shown before, the yield curve does not need to invert to enter a recession. While that phenomenon is a post-World War II normality, it is a post-Depression aberration, and many recession warning indicators are falsely conditioned to look for this first. Be careful.

via http://ift.tt/2qNfLAL Tyler Durden

Relax, There Is No Housing Bubble

Visit Full Archives At The Entry Points

 

Three heavy hitters in real estate – Darius Bozorgi, Veros CEO, Mike Fratantoni, Mortgage Bankers Association chief economist, and Douglas Duncan, Fannie Mae chief economist – all agree, There is no housing bubble. These real estate experts are all in agreement, and they believe the relentless house price increases are just from good old steady growth: “housing market progress really will be slow and steady”. And for “proof” of that slow and steady progress, the Case-Schiller Index rose to a 33-month high in March.

More industry experts are weighing in about why there is absolutely nothing to be concerned about in the US housing market because houses are a great deal: “Home values are likely to keep rising in 2017, but mortgage rates are still low. Plus, lenders are approving more loans than during any period this decade. Home values are on a tear. Not adjusted for inflation, prices are nearly 9% above the March 2007 peak. But as a home buyer, don’t let rising prices scare you. According to a recent report by First American Title Company, homes are still 33% cheaperthan they were in 2006, in real terms – the typical buyer can afford 1/3 more home today than they could eleven years ago. Homes are only about 1/14 more costly now, homes are still a good deal.”  

 Even the one-and-only Warren Buffet has proclaimed that the housing market is not a bubble. The Oracle of Omaha believes it’s a good time to buy a house, even as median home prices are at record highs, and the dreams of being a house Flipper are in full gear. And you certainly shouldn’t be concerned with real estate when the totally unbiased Realtor.com says everything is fine. So should we be worried, as once hot real estate markets, like Miami, are cooling off? San Fransisco home sales in February were the lowest for any month in nine years. And prices are plunging in Manhattan, and even Ivanka Trump wants out.

We’ve heard from several real estate experts in this post proclaiming that US real estate is in great shape, underpinned by strong fundamentals, and there’s absolutely nothing to worry about. In fact, if you’re concerned about a bubble in real estate, you are ignorant of the facts. You only need to listen to the experts, and you can be reassured. Just like before the housing bubble 10 years ago, you should have just listened to the real estate experts, and gone all in on a house.

 All of the arguments (excuses) for the rising home prices into 2006 are eerily similar to the current environment in 2017. We keep hearing arguments like, the higher prices – appear grounded in good fundamentals, are based upon good employment trends and low interest rates, are because it’s cheaper to buy than to rent, are reasonable because there is not enough supply for the demand. Sound familiar?:

1. (January 8, 2005) Alan Reynolds, Senior Fellow, Cato Institute: “No Housing Bubble Trouble,”Washington Times : “In short, we are asked to worry about something that has never happened for reasons still to be coherently explained. ‘Housing bubble’ worrywarts have long been hopelessly confused. It would have been financially foolhardy to listen to them in 2002. It still is.” “Recession Fairy Tales,” Townhall (October 5, 2006): “When it comes to homes . . . many people have spent the last four years fretting that the ‘housing bubble’ might end. That is, they worried that overpriced homes might become more affordable. This is not quite as nonsensical as worrying the price of oil might fall too much, but it’s close.”

2. (July 25, 2004) Kevin Hassett, Director of Economic Policy Studies, American Enterprise Institute: New York Times : “Another bubble-skeptic is Kevin Hassett, director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute and co-author of the fabled ‘Dow 36,000,’ which was published in 1999 when the Dow Jones index was around 11,000. Mr. Hassett says there is an ideological component to the belief in bubbles. Liberals, who tend to believe that government must step in to protect people from market imperfections, will likely see more of them. Conservatives, who like their markets unfettered, will see less. “Mr. Hassett of the conservative American Enterprise Institute thinks housing prices will be pretty much O.K. He acknowledges there might be some bubble dynamics at play in some regions. But he argues that for the most part people are paying more for homes because their incomes are higher and interest rates are lower, reducing the cost to own a home. “Mr. Hassett expects that rising interest rates would raise this cost and home prices would then decline proportionately. But he sees no reason to expect a catastrophic decline. ‘I don’t think a catastrophe is very likely,’ he says.

3. (May 24, 2005) James K. Glassman, Senior Fellow, American Enterprise Institute: “Housing Bubble?,” Capitalism Magzine: “[W]hile such signs of speculation are troubling, there is little solid evidence that a real estate bubble is puffing up. “Even in places where prices are soaring, worries of a bubble could be overblown because higher prices appear grounded in good old fundamentals.”

4. (August 13, 2005) Jude Wanniski, former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal & adviser to President Reagan: “There is No Housing Bubble!!,” The Conservative Voice 

5. (July 5, 2006) Jerry Bowyer, Author of The Bush Boom“Hate to Burst Your (Housing) Bubble: But there isn’t one,” National Review 

6. Jim Cramer, Host of CNBC’s “Mad Money” & Co-Founder, TheStreet.com: “House Beautiful,” New York Magazine (December 8, 2003): “Housing bubble? What housing bubble? The signs are in place for a further run-up in real estate. Breathe easy, mortgage holders. There’s still no place like home.”

7. Christopher Flanagan, Head of ABS Research, J.P. Morgan: “Housing Outlook,” J.P. Morgan Research, June 17, 2005 (no link): “[B]ased on what we know and see in terms of employment and interest rates, it is extremely difficult to see how five years from now we could be looking back and observing a historical 5-year growth rate of, say, less than 5%. That should be more than adequate to support the continued good credit performance of sub-prime mortgage pools. “It is important to understand — we can contemplate home price growth rates declining, albeit modestly, but we do NOT envision home prices declining!”

8. Neil Barsky, Alson Capital Partners, LLC: “What Housing Bubble?,” Wall Street Journal (July 28, 2005): “There is no housing bubble in this country. Our strong housing market is a function of myriad factors with real economic underpinnings: low interest rates, local job growth, the emotional attachment one has for one’s home, one’s view of one’s future earning- power, and parental contributions, all have done their part to contribute to rising home prices. “What we do have is a serious housing shortage and housing affordability crisis.”

9. Chris Mayer, Professor of Real Estate, Columbia Business School, and Todd Sinai, Professor of Real Estate, Wharton School: “Bubble Trouble? Not Likely,” Wall Street Journal (September 19, 2005): “For the past several years, Chicken Littles have squawked that the sky — or the ceiling — is about to fall on the housing market. And it’s tempting to believe them…“Yet basic economic logic suggests that this apparent evidence of a bubble is anything but. Even in the highest-price cities, housing is, at most, slightly more expensive than average.”

10. Jonathan McCarthy, Senior Economist, New York Fed, and Richard W. Peach, Vice President, New York Fed: “Are Home Prices the Next Bubble?,” FRBNY Economic Policy Review (December 2004): “Home prices have been rising strongly since the mid-1990s, prompting concerns that a bubble exists in this asset class and that home prices are vulnerable to a collapse that could harm the U.S. economy. “A close analysis of the U.S. housing market in recent years, however, finds little basis for such concerns. The marked upturn in home prices is largely attributable to strong market fundamentals: Home prices have essentially moved in line with increases in family income and declines in nominal mortgage interest rates.”

11. David Malpass, Chief Economist, Bear Stearns: “So This is a Weak Economy?,” Wall Street Journal (June 28, 2005): “[T]he litany against the U.S. economy is so ingrained and familiar that few disputed this spring’s ‘slowdown.’ When strong data on income, employment, consumption and profits showed 3.5% first-quarter GDP growth and a continuation into the second quarter, the headlines shifted to other attacks — adjustable-rate mortgages, a housing ‘bubble,’ the distribution of income — rather than revising the slowdown story.”

12. Steve Forbes, CEO, Forbes, Inc.: Global Leaders Speakers Series (November 10, 2005): “[Forbes] maintained that there was no ‘housing bubble’ in the U.S. but there was an ‘oil bubble’ driven by speculators.”

13. Brian S. Wesbury, Chief Investment Strategist, Claymore Advisors: “Mr. Greenspan’s Cappuccino,” Wall Street Journal (May 31, 2005): “These nattering nabobs expect a housing collapse to take down the U.S. economy. But excessive pessimism is unwarranted: Fears of a housing bubble are overblown.”

14. Carl Steidtmann, Chief Economist, Deloitte Research: “The Housing Bubble Myth,” Economist’s Corner (July 2005): “When you strip away all of the white noise around a housing bubble, what you find is a robust market for housing that is undergoing several profound changes all of which manifest themselves in higher home price indexes, none of which adds up to a housing price bubble.”

15. Margaret Hwang Smith, Professor of Economics, Pomona College, and Gary Smith, Professor of Economics, Pomona College: “Bubble, Bubble, Where’s the Housing Bubble?,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity (2006): “Our evidence indicates that, even though prices have risen rapidly and some buyers have unrealistic expectations of continuing price increases, the bubble is not, in fact, a bubble in most of these areas in that, under a variety of plausible assumptions, buying a house at current market prices still appears to be an attractive long-term investment.”

16. Charles Himmelberg, Economist, New York Fed (with Columbia professor Chris Mayer and Wharton professor Todd Sinai—see #10, above): “Assessing High House Prices: Bubbles, Fundamentals, and Misperceptions,” Federal Reserve Bank of New York Staff Reports (September 2005): “As of the end of 2004, our analysis reveals little evidence of a housing bubble. In high appreciation markets like San Francisco, Boston, and New York, current housing prices are not cheap, but our calculations do not reveal large price increases in excess of fundamentals.”

17. Jim Jubak, Investing Columnist, MSN Money: Why There is No Housing Bubble,” MSN Money (June 10, 2005): “Housing bubble? What housing bubble? With the 10-year U.S. Treasury bond yielding below 4% and 30-year mortgages available at 5.1%, there isn’t a housing bubble.”

18. James F. Smith, Director, Center for Business Forecasting: “There is No Housing Bubble in the USA: Housing Activity Will Remain At High Levels in 2005 and Beyond,” Business Economics (April 2005): “There is no evidence of a housing ‘bubble’ in the United States and housing demand should stay strong for years to come.”

19. Kathryn Jean Lopez, Editor, National Review Online: “Don’t be Myth-Understood,” National Review (December 21, 2005): “[T]he so-called housing bubble has yet to pop, and likely won’t as long as home ownership remains a tax-advantaged event. Even the New York Times — no parrot of White House talking points — has had to admit that the economy is ‘booming.’”

20. Samuel Lieber, President, Alpine Woods Capital Investors: “Housing Bubble? The Market Won’t Pop, Experts Predict,” Wall Street Journal (April 12, 2006): “We don’t see a bubble. Historically, home prices just don’t go down nationwide unless we are in a significant recession. The last time home prices fell nationwide was in 1990. It’s employment that really counts. The underlying fundamentals of real estate are still very positive. Job creation and household formation drive housing.”

21. Mark Vitner, Senior Economist, Wachovia: “There is No Housing Bubble, Says Senior Economist,” The Virginia-Pilot (January 19, 2006): “‘Everybody is looking for evidence of a housing bubble,’ [Vitner] said. ‘There is not a housing bubble. The supply had not kept up with demand.’”

22. George Karvel, Professor of Real Estate, St. Thomas University: “Housing bubble?,” Minneapolis Star Tribune, October 4, 2005 (via LEXIS): “‘There’s no housing bubble,’ said George Karvel, a professor of real estate at the University of St. Thomas. ‘This is a media-induced frenzy. If I wanted to say there is a housing bubble, I’d have Time and Money magazine camped on my door. They’ve called, and I’ve told them there’s no bubble. Panic sells.” “There is absolutely nothing in any market in the country to indicate there’d be any kind of collapse in housing prices,’ he said.”

23. Glenn Hubbard, Professor of Finance and Economics, Columbia Business School: Face the Nation (August 21, 2005): I think we do have a great deal of froth in housing markets. There’s no doubt about it. I don’t think we’re likely to see a large nominal price collapse, that is largely falling house prices, but I think we’ll see much slower rates of growth in house prices after 2005.

24. Alex Tabarrok, Professor of Economics, George Mason University: “Was there a Housing Bubble?,” Marginal Revolution (Feb. 13, 2008): In the shift to the new equilibrium there was some mild overshooting, especially due to the subprime over expansion, but fundamentally there was no housing bubble [emphasis in the original].

25. Larry Kudlow, Host of CNBC’s “The Kudlow Report” & Economics Editor, National Review: “The Housing Bears Are Wrong Again,” National Review Online (June 20, 2005): All the bond bears have been dead wrong in predicting sky-high mortgage rates. So have all the bubbleheads who expect housing-price crashes in Las Vegas or Naples, Florida, to bring down the consumer, the rest of the economy, and the entire stock market.

 

And we saved the best for last – in October 2005  the Pre-Fed Chairman version of Ben Bernanke was interviewed. This is before his Fedspeak speech impediment took hold, and he was very easily understood: “There’s no housing bubble to go bust”. And then just to reconfirm that becoming Fed Chairman would not alter his cluelessness, in February 2006 he proclaimed: “Housing markets are cooling a bit. Our expectation is that the decline in activity or the slowing in activity will be moderate, that house prices will probably continue to rise.

via http://ift.tt/2s56dAQ Trader Scott

Paris Pullout, Russia Reboots, and LeBron Hate Crimes: The New Fifth Column

Hey, will you be listening to Sirius XM after church on Sunday? Tune into Channel 124, a.k.a. POTUS, at 3 p.m. tomorrow, and you’ll hear the hour-long broadcast version of The Fifth Column podcast, co-hosted by Kmele “Never Fly Coach” Foster, Michael “Hollywood” Moynihan and the author of this blog post. Or you can hear the whole unspooled straight-to-yr-headphones biz right here:

Topics include foolish paternal attempts to play soccer, controversial if telegraphed decisions to pull out of unenforceable non-treaty climate agreements, racist anti-LeBron James vandalism, Russkies galore, and so on.

Not enough for ya? OK, here’s an entertaining, NSFW episode of the great Brilliant Idiots podcast starring DJ Charlamagne Tha God and Reason-loving comedian Andrew Shulz, in which I come on at the 1:14 mark to spool out my working theory on the Russia/Trump story:

More Fifth Column stuff is availabile at iTunes, Stitcher, Google Play, wethefifth.com, @wethefifth, and Facebook.

from Hit & Run http://ift.tt/2rnOZO1
via IFTTT